Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

D70.

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
March 2, 2005 11:19:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I bought a D70 with the with the 18-70mm lens.

The software seems appalling partly because most of it is trial only and
you need to spend another £120 for the full version. Also most of the
Nikon software BSOD's my XP Pro SP2 machine. I've turned DEP off for the
Nikon software but I'm not prepared to do so for everything or uninstall
Sp2.

Is it worth it or is Elements 3 better especially with NEF files?

More about : d70

Anonymous
March 2, 2005 11:57:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 20:19:28 +0000, Leigh Bowden
<LGBowden@bowdenfamily.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

>I bought a D70 with the with the 18-70mm lens.
>
>The software seems appalling partly because most of it is trial only and
>you need to spend another £120 for the full version. Also most of the
>Nikon software BSOD's my XP Pro SP2 machine. I've turned DEP off for the
>Nikon software but I'm not prepared to do so for everything or uninstall
>Sp2.
>
>Is it worth it or is Elements 3 better especially with NEF files?

If you don't have Photoshop already, elements is a good choice. Then
download the RAW importer from Adobe to get it to work with NEF files.

Alternatively try your hand at DCRAW, it's free and works in Linux or
Windows (I presume XP is okay). It's a command line util, which can
turn some people off.
http://www.cybercom.net/~dcoffin/dcraw/

--
Owamanga!
Anonymous
March 3, 2005 7:10:01 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

And I thought Nikon fixed this with Capture 4.2.0. Did you get the upgrade?

Gregor

"Leigh Bowden" <LGBowden@bowdenfamily.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:D 0574i$1hr$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
>I bought a D70 with the with the 18-70mm lens.
>
> The software seems appalling partly because most of it is trial only and
> you need to spend another £120 for the full version. Also most of the
> Nikon software BSOD's my XP Pro SP2 machine. I've turned DEP off for the
> Nikon software but I'm not prepared to do so for everything or uninstall
> Sp2.
>
> Is it worth it or is Elements 3 better especially with NEF files?
Related resources
Anonymous
March 3, 2005 4:25:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Leigh Bowden wrote:
> I bought a D70 with the with the 18-70mm lens.
>
> The software seems appalling partly because most of it is trial only and
> you need to spend another £120 for the full version. Also most of the
> Nikon software BSOD's my XP Pro SP2 machine. I've turned DEP off for the
> Nikon software but I'm not prepared to do so for everything or uninstall
> Sp2.
>
> Is it worth it or is Elements 3 better especially with NEF files?

I just use Nikon Capture to manipulate the NEF files. I uninstalled
Picture Project. I also uninstalled XP SP2 because I kept having
problems with my Winfax software .... would handshake then drop the
line. The PC tech said they had quite of number of walk ins with similar
problems and most were solved after rolling back to XP SP1.
My PC has been rock solid for 3 weeks now .. never gets switched off either.
Bernard.
Anonymous
March 3, 2005 7:48:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Leigh Bowden" <LGBowden@bowdenfamily.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:D 0574i$1hr$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
> I bought a D70 with the with the 18-70mm lens.
>
> The software seems appalling partly because most of it is trial only and
> you need to spend another £120 for the full version. Also most of the
> Nikon software BSOD's my XP Pro SP2 machine. I've turned DEP off for the
> Nikon software but I'm not prepared to do so for everything or uninstall
> Sp2.
>
> Is it worth it or is Elements 3 better especially with NEF files?

IMHO elements 3 is fine for nef files, but I can't directly compare with
Capture. You don't need to download any raw converter, as pse3 has a raw
converter with a nice interface - but you must learn a bit about how to use
it!

Elements 3 is worth the money. Capture is a free download trial (?1 Mo) so
you can try it and see what you think. Many can help you with the raw
converter in PE and try the forums on dpreview for D70. You can use Nikon
View (free download) and not just a trial version. Picture project will put
a plug in into elements 2 so you can use elements 2 for nef files.
Otherwise I'd avoid Picturepoject. You can use Nikon View (free and not a
trial version) and it does well with nef files.

If you don't want to download capture (trial) or buy elements (good value)
try this as a starter! It's free. Open nef with View. Change WB and
exposure (if you want) save as a tiff - then open the tiff with any program
you want (your favorite) and do further editing. Have fun. Ask me any
questions.
Anonymous
March 3, 2005 8:42:47 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 16:48:14 -0500, in rec.photo.digital "larrylook"
<noemail@email.com> wrote:
>converter in PE and try the forums on dpreview for D70. You can use Nikon
>View (free download) and not just a trial version. Picture project will put
>a plug in into elements 2 so you can use elements 2 for nef files.

NV will do this as well. However, while the NV plugin will not work with
earlier versions of PSP, supposedly the PP plugin will.

>Otherwise I'd avoid Picturepoject. You can use Nikon View (free and not a
>trial version) and it does well with nef files.
>
>If you don't want to download capture (trial) or buy elements (good value)
>try this as a starter! It's free. Open nef with View. Change WB and
>exposure (if you want) save as a tiff - then open the tiff with any program
>you want (your favorite) and do further editing. Have fun. Ask me any
>questions.

Agreed as a way to start. Though the Capture trial should be on the PP disc
so if one has that there is no need to dl.

----------
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 12:07:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Nikon Capture is the best way to go


"Leigh Bowden" <LGBowden@bowdenfamily.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:D 0574i$1hr$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
>I bought a D70 with the with the 18-70mm lens.
>
> The software seems appalling partly because most of it is trial only and
> you need to spend another £120 for the full version. Also most of the
> Nikon software BSOD's my XP Pro SP2 machine. I've turned DEP off for the
> Nikon software but I'm not prepared to do so for everything or uninstall
> Sp2.
>
> Is it worth it or is Elements 3 better especially with NEF files?
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 12:07:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 21:07:03 +0800, "Marli" <xxxx@xxxx.xx> wrote:

>"Leigh Bowden" <LGBowden@bowdenfamily.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:D 0574i$1hr$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
>>I bought a D70 with the with the 18-70mm lens.
>>
>> The software seems appalling partly because most of it is trial only and
>> you need to spend another £120 for the full version. Also most of the
>> Nikon software BSOD's my XP Pro SP2 machine. I've turned DEP off for the
>> Nikon software but I'm not prepared to do so for everything or uninstall
>> Sp2.
>>
>> Is it worth it or is Elements 3 better especially with NEF files?
>
>Nikon Capture is the best way to go

Is there any reasoning behind that advice you'd care to share?

--
Owamanga!
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 9:38:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I compare Nikon Capture 4.2 with Photoshop CS. Capture offers the following
advantages when only NEF file processing is required without heavy-duty
fudging:

1) Convenience. It saves changes in the NEF files itself. With Photoshop CS,
you need to create TIFF or PSD.

2) Price. Nikon Capture 4.2 is much cheaper than CS.

3) Histogram functions. Especially, NC 4.2 has a very neat feature to relate
pixel information to histogram information.

4) Remote camera control. Nikon Capture comes with Capture Control.

5) New D-Lighting feature that works similar to the older Dynamic Exposure
Extender (DEE) but works better.

6) Works conveniently fast on an AMD Athlon XP system.

7) It's provided by Nikon and hence will most likely support NEF better than
the competition can handle it with additional plug-ins.


Gregor
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 4:16:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 06:38:03 GMT, "GTO" <gregor_o@NOSPAMyahoo.com>
wrote:

>I compare Nikon Capture 4.2 with Photoshop CS. Capture offers the following
>advantages when only NEF file processing is required without heavy-duty
>fudging:
>
>1) Convenience. It saves changes in the NEF files itself. With Photoshop CS,
>you need to create TIFF or PSD.

Photoshop RAW importer does save changes to the NEF settings
(exposure, brightness, contrast, color balance, vignetting etc), but
to support photoshop layers and such (any *serious* editing - which we
are considering out of scope now), yes you are better using the native
format of Photoshop, and can't put these pixel-level changes back into
the NEF file.

>2) Price. Nikon Capture 4.2 is much cheaper than CS.

Yes, given it's much more limited functionality, that seems fair. The
reason I'd choose CS is that it brings with it so much more that would
probably be useful to a digital photographer. If we look at just NEF
conversion alone, I'd agree, Nikon Capture would make more sense,
especially from the financial standpoint.

>3) Histogram functions. Especially, NC 4.2 has a very neat feature to relate
>pixel information to histogram information.

Not certain exactly what you mean, I only used Nikon Capture once and
didn't get into it that heavily. Is this the ability to highlight
over/underexposed areas in the image itself?. The PS Raw importer has
that function, giving a color-coded highlight on the image itself
showing where any blown highlights (and what channels were involved)
and the same for underexposed shadows.

>4) Remote camera control. Nikon Capture comes with Capture Control.

This is indeed a unique feature, and I can see it being extremely
useful for some people / situations - especially if you have a laptop.

>5) New D-Lighting feature that works similar to the older Dynamic Exposure
>Extender (DEE) but works better.

Again I think you can get similar results with the shadow-highlights
function within Photoshop (and I bet, far more control).

>6) Works conveniently fast on an AMD Athlon XP system.

Adobe's products are known to be heavy (especially starting up) but
also works reasonably fast (PS may be slower, dunno, haven't timed
them).

>7) It's provided by Nikon and hence will most likely support NEF better than
>the competition can handle it with additional plug-ins.

You would think so wouldn't you, but Nikon's ideas on required
features don't always match the sum of every user's requirements. In
particular, DCRAW, a freeware tool for RAW conversion is positioned to
overtake both the PS RAW importer and the Nikon tool for detailed
control of the conversion.

In the link below, DCRAW is being compared to Canon's RAW importer. In
particular I'd ask you to look at the grass and dirt in the second
image (the one of a wall). An amazing improvement over the
manufacturer's attempt. Sadly at this time, there are bayer artifacts
being introduced in high contrast areas (check the sign on the wall
for example).

http://www.aim-dtp.net/aim/digicam/dcraw/index.htm

I know this is Canon, not Nikon - but they are manufacturers of equal
calibre and I'd bet you'd see similar differences compared to Nikon's
importer.

--
Owamanga!
March 4, 2005 4:16:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Owamanga wrote:

> On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 06:38:03 GMT, "GTO" <gregor_o@NOSPAMyahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>I compare Nikon Capture 4.2 with Photoshop CS. Capture offers the following
>>advantages when only NEF file processing is required without heavy-duty
>>fudging:
>>
>>1) Convenience. It saves changes in the NEF files itself. With Photoshop CS,
>>you need to create TIFF or PSD.
>
>
> Photoshop RAW importer does save changes to the NEF settings
> (exposure, brightness, contrast, color balance, vignetting etc), but
> to support photoshop layers and such (any *serious* editing - which we
> are considering out of scope now), yes you are better using the native
> format of Photoshop, and can't put these pixel-level changes back into
> the NEF file.


With CS you can save settings in 'sidecar' files for moving to another
drive & archiving. It's easy to apply settings from one picture to many
in the file browser.


>
>>2) Price. Nikon Capture 4.2 is much cheaper than CS.
>
>
> Yes, given it's much more limited functionality, that seems fair. The
> reason I'd choose CS is that it brings with it so much more that would
> probably be useful to a digital photographer. If we look at just NEF
> conversion alone, I'd agree, Nikon Capture would make more sense,
> especially from the financial standpoint.
>
>
>>3) Histogram functions. Especially, NC 4.2 has a very neat feature to relate
>>pixel information to histogram information.
>
>
> Not certain exactly what you mean, I only used Nikon Capture once and


One thing I like with Capture is you can apply curves during the
conversion. The curve is superimposed on the histogram.



> didn't get into it that heavily. Is this the ability to highlight
> over/underexposed areas in the image itself?. The PS Raw importer has
> that function, giving a color-coded highlight on the image itself
> showing where any blown highlights (and what channels were involved)
> and the same for underexposed shadows.
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 4:29:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <npmg2157nqeg9om2okhp3g9iq6kks35pfe@4ax.com>,
Owamanga <nomail@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 06:38:03 GMT, "GTO" <gregor_o@NOSPAMyahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>7) It's provided by Nikon and hence will most likely support NEF better than
>>the competition can handle it with additional plug-ins.
>
>You would think so wouldn't you, but Nikon's ideas on required
>features don't always match the sum of every user's requirements. In
>particular, DCRAW, a freeware tool for RAW conversion is positioned to
>overtake both the PS RAW importer and the Nikon tool for detailed
>control of the conversion.

You do realise that Photoshop's raw convertor is partially derived from
DCRAW, right?
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 7:03:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 13:29:42 GMT, Chris Brown
<cpbrown@ntlworld.no_uce_please.com> wrote:

>In article <npmg2157nqeg9om2okhp3g9iq6kks35pfe@4ax.com>,
>Owamanga <nomail@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 06:38:03 GMT, "GTO" <gregor_o@NOSPAMyahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>7) It's provided by Nikon and hence will most likely support NEF better than
>>>the competition can handle it with additional plug-ins.
>>
>>You would think so wouldn't you, but Nikon's ideas on required
>>features don't always match the sum of every user's requirements. In
>>particular, DCRAW, a freeware tool for RAW conversion is positioned to
>>overtake both the PS RAW importer and the Nikon tool for detailed
>>control of the conversion.
>
>You do realise that Photoshop's raw convertor is partially derived from
>DCRAW, right?

Yes I had heard that, and as such the PS RAW converter will always be
lagging behind any advances made in DCRAW. For now, I'll still use PS
one because it's so handy. :-)

--
Owamanga!
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 7:03:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Owamanga" <nomail@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>You do realise that Photoshop's raw convertor is partially derived from
>>DCRAW, right?
>
> Yes I had heard that, and as such the PS RAW converter will always be
> lagging behind any advances made in DCRAW. For now, I'll still use PS
> one because it's so handy. :-)

And let me just add a "Get Smart" moment: "Not DCRAW. DCRAW!"
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 11:24:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 11:09:43 -0500, "Cynicor"
<j.t.r.u..p.i..n...@speakeasy.net> wrote:

....
>And let me just add a "Get Smart" moment: "Not DCRAW. DCRAW!"

LOL!!!! Are we the only two people left on earth who remember that
line (rine?)



+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ The News Guy(Mike) - Seinfeld Lists
+ (two mirrored sites)
+ http://membres.lycos.fr/tnguym
+ http://wave.prohosting.com/tnguym NOWTHISWORKS
+ All things Seinfeld; scripts, trivia, lists,
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Anonymous
March 5, 2005 12:11:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Cynicor" <j.t.r.u..p.i..n...@speakeasy.net> wrote in
news:MsKdndZ3ZpTXFbXfRVn-vQ@speakeasy.net:

>
> "Owamanga" <nomail@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>You do realise that Photoshop's raw convertor is partially derived from
>>>DCRAW, right?
>>
>> Yes I had heard that, and as such the PS RAW converter will always be
>> lagging behind any advances made in DCRAW. For now, I'll still use PS
>> one because it's so handy. :-)
>
> And let me just add a "Get Smart" moment: "Not DCRAW. DCRAW!"
>
>

Are you sure it was Get Smart, I remember him being from Gadget..

Mick Brown
www.photo.net/photos/mlbrown
Anonymous
March 5, 2005 3:20:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

TheNewsGuy(Mike) <tnguymNoSpamm@yaho.com> wrote:

><j.t.r.u..p.i..n...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>And let me just add a "Get Smart" moment: "Not DCRAW. DCRAW!"
>
>LOL!!!! Are we the only two people left on earth who remember that
>line (rine?)

No. (Sorry about that, chief)

--
Ken Tough
Anonymous
March 7, 2005 2:40:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Owamanga <nomail@hotmail.com> wrote:

>"GTO" <gregor_o@NOSPAMyahoo.com>
>wrote:
>>I compare Nikon Capture 4.2 with Photoshop CS. Capture offers the following
>>advantages when only NEF file processing is required without heavy-duty
>>fudging:
....
>>2) Price. Nikon Capture 4.2 is much cheaper than CS.
>
>Yes, given it's much more limited functionality, that seems fair. The
>reason I'd choose CS is that it brings with it so much more that would
>probably be useful to a digital photographer. If we look at just NEF
>conversion alone, I'd agree, Nikon Capture would make more sense,
>especially from the financial standpoint.

What about versus Photoshop Elements 3.0? It's about the same price
as Nikon Capture. I'm trying the Elements trial version, and am
quite happy with the contrast/colour changes I can make, but haven't
yet used the Capture trial.

How about converting to B&W.. I recall some way you should be able
to manipulate colour channels separately in Photoshop, but don't
know if that's only CS-relevant or also applies to Elements. Is
Capture any better for flexibility in converting to monochrome?

--
Ken Tough
Anonymous
March 7, 2005 7:47:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ken Tough <ken@objectech.co.uk> wrote:

>How about converting to B&W.. I recall some way you should be able
>to manipulate colour channels separately in Photoshop, but don't
>know if that's only CS-relevant or also applies to Elements. Is
>Capture any better for flexibility in converting to monochrome?

Actually, I see that I can use the Enhance->Color Saturation
dialog to map various colour ranges to different brightness
in the final monochrome. Quite nice, really, just like having
an infinite number of colour filters at your fingertips.

Is this possible in Nikon Capture?

--
Ken Tough
!