I see clearly what Ron means. Perhaps due to seeing things similar. My combining nx2 and PS and 0 – 2 quick tool uses in ACR (tiff only) gives me far the best results. I have done extreme tests of best CS 3 ACR v nx2 (I was used perfectly to ACR) – IQ wise (my only criterion). After which I was horrified to come back to Adobe’s enterprise. NX2 became instantly part of my camera – that's what convertor is if that built in it - jpg is not used. I am very sensitive to wb/color accuracy, rendering in shadows etc. Don’t need mass working nor do I need to spend a weekend on one shot with ‘PS possibilities’ only to forget what I saw eventually. Or what my own face looks like. Similar result on Canon. Nowhere near simple DPP. Only alternative was Phase One convertor both case. I wont be extensive on this. I have met even people to whome tweaking all possible in PS turned in more enjoyment than the original intent. It so many of us.
Although test results somehow still fresh in memory (despite many swift Adobe’s market rotations – with very slow actual movement where it counts for me) – I see they are coming closer and there are many valuable and more serious improvements (I mean profiles too – though there shouldn’t actually be any in acr.. perhaps some Adobe ones.. ). And I hear more of those improvements from people. Thank god for that.
And nx2? I love it as I love my Nikon camera. This little fellow makes Adobe lovers seeking reassurance over n again.. Yes, that giant conglomerate still a bit shy next to it in some crucial respects. And rightfully so. But it is the Nikon's doing I suspect it's fair to mention - I want to believe at least! Its cooperation with Adobe seems a bit stiff. Many landscape shooters would feel terrible to say nx2 good bye as yet.
Adobe PS? Many things are not so difficult as they sound. Whoever wants I’ll send him a brief description how to edit a simple layer in seconds, it is really not much different to Capture’s points. The fact I personally find PS more 'laboratory' and nx2 more 'photographic' is certainly too subjective n fairly far from the point.
PS offers the most practical and sufficient editing as a complex, whether you need quantum of it or just your selection of a few steps. Surprisingly, nx2 can do a lot of it too. Not that complex, precise and practical though. I am very glad I can combine it with Adobe PS.
I think the Elements is a sensible thing. But I hit some obstructions in my workflow – I’d have to save jpg twice which I wont do simply (?- faintly recalling now) if I want to stick precisely to my wf – or something similar and I think it was the last version I checked.
Tried seriously LR (+last versions of 2, betas), I disliked the interface continuously. Never liked this sw. But I want to believe its rather me and basically matter of getting used to it.
Bridge.. Good worker, no messing, results. Always liked it, a brilliant PS connection.
I use IDImager. Takes care of my everything. I can be using some 20% of its potential but for that I truly love it -5.06v. Updates come kind of weekly. The best viewer I found during extensive tests, the centre of my workflow and a phenomenal IM. It has its moments but grows just before my eyes, like nx2 I am able to forgive for its values a lot, not that it needs that(!) – just that I would be ready to do so. Thanks to Hertwig van Zwietering that makes his appearance on this forum too occasionally.
my little pence,
Hynek
--
http://www.sunwaysite.com 
With NX2 V2, I can't tell the difference with the older version, it's still a dog, wish I wouldn't have wasted the $$ for the upgrade...
