[mst]

[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1300312293' post='6888']

the suggestion to use DNG was to minimise differences... not to eliminate them.[/quote]



Than why bother at all? There'd still be differences (check Klaus' post #9 again), so we wouldn't gain anything.



[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1300312293' post='6888']At the moment, aren't you guys using Apple Aperture for Canon and Adobe Camera Raw for Nikon or something like that?[/quote]



Well, yes ... "something like that". It's ACR for the old Nikon DX reviews, most of Klaus' reviews (AFAIK), LR for m4/3, Raw Developer for Nikon FX, the upcoming D7000 based DX and M9 reviews.



[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1300312293' post='6888']

Is there some benefit in maximising the differences that I'm not quite seeing here?

[/quote]



We don't maximise the differences. We use the tools that are available and get the job done at the time we start the reviews for a new system. There may be years between those decisions. For reasons already explained we stick to a given tool once chosen.



I chose Raw Developer over Adobe because it has a very useful batch mode that makes things a lot easier during analysis (that's the benefit). I'm sure Klaus would use it, too, if it wasn't a Mac only tool.



-- Markus