Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Nikon's ViewNX2 software - any benefits?  (Read 726 times)
PeterAit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1970



WWW
« on: April 30, 2013, 02:40:24 PM »
ReplyReply

My new D600 came with this software. Is there any reason I might want to use it (as opposed to LightRoom and PS)? I like to keep things simple, and would rather not install it if there is no real advantage.
Logged

Peter
"Photographic technique is a means to an end, never the end itself."
View my photos at http://www.peteraitken.com
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5532


WWW
« Reply #1 on: April 30, 2013, 02:58:20 PM »
ReplyReply

It'll make your raw files look just like your jpeg files :~)
Logged
PeterAit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1970



WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 30, 2013, 03:10:54 PM »
ReplyReply

It'll make your raw files look just like your jpeg files :~)

LOL! Thanks, I am happy to feel free to delegate the program CD to my coaster collection.
Logged

Peter
"Photographic technique is a means to an end, never the end itself."
View my photos at http://www.peteraitken.com
jrp
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 77


« Reply #3 on: May 01, 2013, 03:02:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Is there any reason I might want to use it (as opposed to LightRoom and PS)?

I prefer the colours generated by View NX / Capture NX to those produced by ACR/Lightroom. So generate TIFFs (using Capture NX, but you can do most of what you need in View NX) that I finish in Photoshop.
Logged
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2875


« Reply #4 on: May 02, 2013, 03:28:10 AM »
ReplyReply

I recently re installed it because it has - unlike LR - a focus confirmation indicator. Handy if you think you might have back/front focusing problems and wish to confirm you don't.
Logged

stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2875


« Reply #5 on: May 02, 2013, 03:32:54 AM »
ReplyReply

I prefer the colours generated by View NX / Capture NX to those produced by ACR/Lightroom. So generate TIFFs (using Capture NX, but you can do most of what you need in View NX) that I finish in Photoshop.

This is subjective with respect to colour rendering. Some believe if you have a Nikon camera - I have several - then Nikon "knows best" and that their conversion is superior to other converters. A matter of taste.
Logged

Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5532


WWW
« Reply #6 on: May 02, 2013, 04:23:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Some believe if you have a Nikon camera - I have several - then Nikon "knows best" and that their conversion is superior to other converters.

One could argue that Nikon software may be better "at default" and clearly better at matching the in-camera JPEGs, but...if you have half a clue how to use ACR/LR, that argument falls to the wayside really quick. If you like the camera "looks" (what Nikon/Canon thinks your raw should look like), go for it...but it's not "right" nor "technically correct", it's just a match to the camera jpegs...
Logged
Jack Hogan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 250


« Reply #7 on: May 02, 2013, 11:35:36 AM »
ReplyReply

I like VNX2 and its big brother CNX2 because I try to get things right in camera, and opening the NEF to look just like the OOC image is a great time saver for me - especially if I used ADL, which I tend to do often these days.

Last time I looked (about a year ago) CNX2 was also better than the competition at a number of automatic little things under the hood, such as automatic CA and (especially if you own an 'e' or a D7100) moiré correction.

Jack
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad