As for support of future file formats, I have much more confidence in the continued support of the file format from the manufacturere than I do of a file format from a company that doesn't even make cameras. But as you say, so many users so many workflows While I had no intention in saying what you must do only what you could do (nor do I disrespect your workflow), it's fine by me you do feel that way, no problem. And also no problem in your believing of the current 200 different Raw file formats that will be still supported in about 20 years by the same camera manufacturers (Minolta is not producing camera's nowadays, yet they where the first with AF systems. Olympus might also not be there in a few years) With every new camera there is a new Raw format, do you really think in twenty years time the maybe 1000 different Raw files will stay supported by the new software and OS of that future time?? While I have great respect for vendors like Canon and Nikon regarding their production of camera's, I really have never enjoyed the software they produced, it is very limited in editing, very slow and therefore unproductive. And I never understood why they have to produce a new Raw type for each new camera. And by the way, if you use Bridge it might be safe to assume you also use ACR. Until now Adobe, the company that knows next to nothing of the production of camera's but almost everything about the software to use for working with the digital data from that cameras, has been so kind to offer support for almost all that different code of Raw freely. Personally I have more fait in the open standard DNG provides, but as said, no problem you do believe the camera vendors will do support all their own created types of Raw, even if don't sell them anymore for 10 years:-)
... View more