And I thought you might like to hear my thoughts on the matter. Lord knows everybody else has contributed their opinion. I shot some images in RAW+JPEG, and I noticed a few things comparing the two right away. 1)The RAW image was much sharper straight out of the camera than the JPEG. 2)The RAW image had considerably more noise than the JPEG. The JPEG's looked very soft straight out of the camera next to the RAW; but in five seconds, you could adjust the sharpness of the JPEG in Photoshop and be able to tell no difference in that area. You can't, however, get rid of noise, and the RAW seemed to have quite a bit of that. Being able to adjust the WB was a handy feature, but none of the pictures I took really benefited from having that option available. So, in conclusion, I believe I'll just keep on shooting JPEG. It is slightly softer before post processing, true, but there is just too much noise in the RAW files to make me a believer.