I've been wrestling with the LR/C1P choice for a couple months now, after deciding to leave Aperture. Choosing a DAM/RAW converter obviously a huge decision, and it seems we're fairly locked in with whatever choice we make. There are other options besides these two, any they may be very good options, but C1P and LR are the two that I've focused on as one-stop solutions. Here's some thoughts, in no particular order:
-I've heard all the arguments that Lightroom is more of a neutral "digital negative", and that I need to develop my own import presets in Lightroom, but I just can't seem to get where I want to with this, all the time. In a particular use case, I do a lot of ISO bracketing-- when I import into LR, I can't create a preset that says (if ISO > 400 then NR=25 || if ISO > 800 then NR=60) etc, which is what C1P seems to automatically do (NR and sharpening are very nicely applied at import, most of the time in C1P). For some, they don't want the software making these decisions for them at import. For me, C1 does a good enough job that it's worth it. I can, however, get a good starting point with many other situations in LR using presets I've made. If your camera is supported by LR, definitely choose one of the "Camera" presets, instead of the default of "Adobe Standard" in the "Camera Calibration" pane. This helps with color accuracy a lot, IME. Don't discount LR until you have a chance to experiment and create your own preset-- I think this is essential to the workflow in LR; I didn't know the importance of this when I was first comparing.
-There is no question in my mind that LR has stronger organizational and library functions. There's similar functions for most features in C1P, but they're clunkier and a little less polished, IMO. When I'm performing an initial rate/cull, LR has the "auto advance after rate/flag" feature, which saves me lots of keystrokes and just makes the chore a little smoother.
-LR is also more comprehensive, feature-wise, in general. Not having geotagging from a map, LR Mobile (ok, CC only), the new pano and HDR features, etc., aren't deal breakers on their own considering C1P, but cumulatively it's something to consider, especially for me as a hobbyist.
-I really like the customization abilities of C1P. You can program just about any keystroke, which is really useful (for me, color labels and a 100% zoom toggle). I really missed the floating fullscreen UI of Aperture, and C1P more closely resembles this. You can even snap tool panels off and place wherever you'd like.
I am still in an extended trial phase of both, and have clearly not made up my mind. I don't think you can go wrong with either, and it may well come down to personal preference. I just thought I'd share my thoughts from the time I've invested in this so far, in case it helps!
