A disappointing review in that it's supposed to be a comparison of raw converter software, which to my mind means the image quality is most important. However, there is very little discussion of the quality of the images versus the the other aspects that really have nothing to do with the quality of the converted images -
Speed Image quality and editing tools Imaging workflow Output options Asset management Additional features
So only one page is dedicated to image quality while the vast majority of the review focuses on other significantly less important elements.
I believe "Life After Photoshop" did a much better assessment of these three software programs relative to image quality, which is the most important aspect to me -
They came up with significantly different conclusions.
A worthwhile review -
I used to think posting comments on web sites was a great idea. Unfortunately, too many people think posting comments is their opportunity to bash a competing brand or another person's opinion.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. If it's your opinion, that's fine, but don't bash someone for their opinion. If I want to switch to another brand, that's my right and really on one's elses business and vice versa.
I own an EOS 20D that has served me well. I'm now considering upgrading to a new DSLR and am seriously considering going with Nikon. In comparing the 5D MK III to the D800, the D800 offers me more of what I want since I focus on landscapes and resolution when printing on my ipf6300 is an important factor.
Most current DSLRs are a big leap forward from the 20D and I'm ultimately going to go with the one that fulfills my requirements, not make a decision because someone on a forum said choosing one brand/camera over another was the right or wrong choice - that's my opinion.