Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

luminosity

macrumors 65816
Original poster
It's remarkably cumbersome in terms of GUI, but when it comes to raw conversion power (pun intended), it's unbeatable. To use what may be the most mediocre converter as a comparison, I compared my 14 bit D300 RAW file as opened by Leopard in Preview to one opened in NX2. The difference is amazing. Leopard must be throwing away a lot of data, RAW file or not. The NX2 version looked tremendous.

The colors pop in a way I've never seen with any other program.

Any similar experiences out there with fellow Nikon users?
 
I noticed the exact same thing. NX 2 works great with Nikon raw files which is to be expected. I have both NX 2 and Aperture and the difference is easily distinguished. Aperture loses some of the settings. Like if I had vivid selected Aperture would import like I had selected neutral.
 
Is it still running like a total PITA? I recall Capture NX 1 ran horribly on a well-equipped computer.
 
Is it still running like a total PITA? I recall Capture NX 1 ran horribly on a well-equipped computer.

I'm not sure. I don't have a good reference point, and I've no editing knowledge to speak of. It's mainly the converter that interests me right now.

Editing skills to follow, I hope 🙂.
 
Fair enough. I moved away from NX because it processed like a bear. However, I have found a rather nice mixture of Raw Photo Processor, Aperture, and PS. I should get back into using Bibble, but I have not.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.