I have long praised the English Standard Version for its elegance and readability. While not perfect, it is superior to the New American Bible (and all of its revisions) used in the Latin Church's Lectionary. I have yet to put the ESV side by side with the RSV-CE2, and that would be most interesting. My understanding is that the ESV started with the text of the RSV and intended to do a minor update, and as part of the process looked at the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. And that the RSV-CE2 simply "un-Thou-hasted" the text (but I should note that the RSV-CE2 received Vatican approval without a single correction).
I think it is unfair to complain that the ESV stuck with the Masoretic text. It is an update to the RSV and not really a fresh translation. The ESV does frequently provide a footnote noting that the Sepuagint has a different text, then gives the text in English. How extensive that is, I don't know.
