D200 - Use Nikon Capture or shoot jpg?

[srwatters]

While I'm patiently waiting for Adobe to update Camera RAW to 3.3 and support the D200, do I use Nikon Capture or just shoot fine jpg? I can set the camera to do mininal processing and still tweak using CS2 or go ahead and shoot RAW and give Capture 4.4 another whirl. What I may do is the best of both worlds and shoot RAW + jpg fine. Adds up to 20MB / image, but who cares right? Storage is cheap and I shoot mostly in the studio.

What are all you other D200 owners going to do?

[engstrom]

Originally Posted by srwatters

What I may do is the best of both worlds and shoot RAW + jpg fine. Adds up to 20MB / image, but who cares right? Storage is cheap and I shoot mostly in the studio.

What are all you other D200 owners going to do?

I'm not a D200 owner but my vote would be RAW + JPEG fine. That way you could work with your images and still go back and process them in ACR when they release the update. As you said, who cares about the storage space. One of the members of dpreview uses a tag line at the end of his posts that I couldn't agree with more: "Shoot RAW because memory is cheap but memories are priceless"

[jeffkohn]

Did you try the ACR 3.4 beta? It might work. Supposedly there has been little if any change to the NEF format with the D200. Otherwise I guess RAW+JPG is the best way to hedge your bets. I've been shooting RAW so long I wouldn't know what to do if I had to shoot JPEG and start worrying about nuisances such as in-camera WB, etc. :)

[Will Raybourn]

Scott, you may want to give Capture another go....they have done a few updates in the last few months that have made batch processing a lot easier. I've been using it even after getting CS2, since the updates were done. Give it a whirl, it's improved lately.

[Joe_Lorenzini]

Whoa. What exactly do you have against Capture?

_/oe

[Liz]

Will Raw Shooter essentials work on Nikon files?

[bullsparade]

RawShooter doesn't support it yet, but the programmers are requsting some of the files shot in various lighting conditons, etc... to get a quick update out until Nikon gives out more info on the encoding.

I have to ask this...why oh why would any company release its equipment without giving the software guys a heads up? They could have contacted Adobe or some other company months ago and had this worked out ahead of the camera release.

Sorry Scott...I cant say I feel your pain but I am bummed out for ya.

[markperez]

Originally Posted by bullsparade

RawShooter doesn't support it yet, but the programmers are requsting some of the files shot in various lighting conditons, etc... to get a quick update out until Nikon gives out more info on the encoding.

I have to ask this...why oh why would any company release its equipment without giving the software guys a heads up? They could have contacted Adobe or some other company months ago and had this worked out ahead of the camera release.

Sorry Scott...I cant say I feel your pain but I am bummed out for ya.

Simple answer probably is they want people to buy and use Nikon capture.

[bullsparade]

as if spending $1700+ on the body isnt enough they need another $80? Thats just wrong....

well Scott looks like you are out of luck...so I will pony up and switch to the darkside and take that camera off your hands. I dont want you to be limited when it comes to shooting those great models...sigh, the things I am willing to do for friends.

[srwatters]

Originally Posted by jeffkohn

Did you try the ACR 3.4 beta? It might work. Supposedly there has been little if any change to the NEF format with the D200. Otherwise I guess RAW+JPG is the best way to hedge your bets. I've been shooting RAW so long I wouldn't know what to do if I had to shoot JPEG and start worrying about nuisances such as in-camera WB, etc. :)

ACR 3.3 is the Beta and it doesn't support it yet. I'm with you on using ACR. I actually didn't even think about the issue until I shot my GMB card last night and went to open it so I could start the calibration process. DOH! So for now it's shoot jpg + RAW and play around with Capture until Adobe lets loose with 3.3 and D200 support. BTW, when I fail again, I'll come running for help with the calibration scripts. At least this time I'm going to use the two newer scripts plus the checker to try to get closer. Ever since you helped me with the numbers on the D70, my color has been spot on (until I mess with it, of course ).

[srwatters]

Originally Posted by Joe_Lorenzini

Whoa. What exactly do you have against Capture?

It's slow.
The interface is klunky.
The batch processor used to be hard to use. (I haven't seriously tried v4 yet)
Did I mention it's SLOW.

But now I have no choice... at least for a while.

[srwatters]

Originally Posted by bullsparade

as if spending $1700+ on the body isnt enough they need another $80? Thats just wrong....

well Scott looks like you are out of luck...so I will pony up and switch to the darkside and take that camera off your hands. I dont want you to be limited when it comes to shooting those great models...sigh, the things I am willing to do for friends.

You're such a sweetheart. I could almost give you a big wet one

I already own Capture and just updated it to 4.4.1 so I'm OK. I do appreciate your offer but I'll try to manage...

[Joe_Lorenzini]

Originally Posted by srwatters

It's slow.
The interface is klunky.
The batch processor used to be hard to use. (I haven't seriously tried v4 yet)
Did I mention it's SLOW.

Slow to open, slow to save, not slow to work with.
Batch is efficient when lighting conditions throughout all images are similar.

Interface klunky?!? I dunno, it's the interface that does it for me. All the controls match in-camera controls so it's almost like using the camera when adjusting. It's also easy to save out settings for particular situations (landscape, portrait, stadium lighting, etc...) that you can apply over and over (useful for batch operations as well).

Now, I'm not slamming ACR. I do like it, it's more versatile, it's integrated with Photoshop and it's more universal but for me, I find I get better results out of Capture.

And yes, I totally agree that charging $90 for it is ludicris.

_/oe