I disagree. It depends on whether you are using a good raw software in your workflow for example C1, RSE/RSP or Bibble. A good raw software will actually help you save time to post process jpeg files. If you need fast 'proofs' most good raw software will have some form of feature that allows you to set WB across a selection of images in one click (camera AWB is great but in mixed lights, it is more wrong than correct), etc and get proofs out very quickly. I have seen a lot of improvements in raw software particularly 'adaptive' technologies incorporated over the last 2 years. Its quite amazing how a plugin for example can do make an image 'pop' moreOriginally Posted by Hitz
Storage cards like Sandisk Ultra II are so cheap today .. around 25% of what I used to pay for CF cards less than 2 years ago.
The other point is that with RAW you have the digital negative. When improvements are made to raw software in the future, you can always go back and regenerate a much better image quality. jpeg on the other hand is a one way destructive process where the camera will decide how an image will look. For casual snap shots where you do not expect to post process the image, jpegs are still recommended. Or if you are new to digital image post processing, I would also think jpeg is the easier approach to things