Folks, I have done alot of RAW conversions (20D) with ACR. I like ACR's interface and the chromatic abberation correction. However, I seem to keep coming across situations where ACR does not do a good a job as Canon's RAW conversion (whether in camera to jpeg or via DPP). I have seen the following issues: - sudden light to dark tranasitions (e.g. a lampost against a bright sky). ACR seems to generate color artifacts whereas Canon's conversion significantly less so. - very dark areas of the image. Canon's conversion seems to generate smoother more 'photographic' or desireable results whereas ACR tends to look noisy and/or posterized. I have noticed that sometimes the way ACR converts, it creates a spike at '0' in the Blue channel histogram. DPP with the same image does not (even with a whole lot of tweaking, ACR still does this). I wonder if this is why shadows appear noisier? - color rendition. Canon seems to give a more neutral natural looking result, whereas I have seen some casts when using ACR. I typically set my WB to Sunlight when working outdoors, and the results seem to be more what one would expect with Canon's conversion, even when I use the 'as shot' setting in ACR - I have also occasionally noticed less detail with ACR but this is hard to quantify (e.g. I had one image where a building reflected in the glass of another building, and there was noticeably less detail in the ACR image in this reflected area. Sharpening was off, but even with the sharpening turned way up in ACR, the detail was still less than the DPP conversion. Yet, other parts of the image did not exhibit less detail...a strange one). I really want to use ACR for the chromatic abberation and workflow. But based on my experience, I now am using DPP. Also, it would seem not even to make sense for me to consider lightroom if it is built on the same RAW conversion engine as ACR. Has anyone else seen these or other issues with Adobe Camera RAW? Thanks W