[Parallax]

Raw exclusively. Shooting jpeg is like making a complex recipe and tossing out all of the extra ingredients before you taste it.

[hcc]

I use JPEG 95% of the time and JPEG+RAW for a few special situations. With the K-7, I set JPEG 6 Mp [***] typically.

There is nothing to be ashamed for using JPEG and I think that many people use JPEG although they might not have responded yet.

[bkpix]

RAW, always, on K20D.

Lightroom made it painless.

[lurchlarson]

I shoot raw 98% of the time with both my K200d and my wife's Oly e-620.

There are a few rare occasions (so rare that I can't remember off the top of my head) where I do shoot jpg but those are very few and far between.

[snostorm]

Hi Ivo,

I'm a jpg shooter 99+% of the time. I shoot a K-7at 14MP, ***. I shoot birds primarily, and have a target medium of prints at sizes between 5x7 and 16-20.

I've found that by tweaking the settings and getting proper exposure, jpegs are fine for my purposes.

Scott

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

RAW (DNG) - you can adjust exposure, WB, lens distortion and other things - much simpler than if you just had a JPG.

[Naim Khan]

RAW only and then batch process in 'Elements 7.0'. If I am not then happy with any of the jpegs will process the RAW file individually.

[distudio]

I shoot with Raw+Jpeg. I use Jpeg just to reference but for everything that I like I post process the raw.

Me too, but I have jpeg set to 2MP, which is fine for most normal uses including small prints for friends and internet distribution.

[Rondec]

RAW on my K20, just got a K7 and I am still shooting RAW generally, although the fact that the K7 has a number of features that are applied to Jpeg encourages shooting Jpeg more (particularly the lens distortion control).

[Perrumpo]

I've been shooting RAW+ with my K-x. I'm pretty familiar with PP in Photoshop and iPhoto, and getting there with Aperture, but since I'm new to a DSLR, I use the JPEG version to test different settings to see what's working best for the respective shot. Also, JPEG allows me to skim my photos easily to find the best ones, then I'll use the RAW of those files. For some reason, Macs apply a greenish white balance to Pentax RAWs, whether in iPhoto or Aperture. It is not difficult to apply a batch change to fix this, but it makes the first look-through easier with JPEG until Apple updates with that fixed.

[Itai]

100% JPEG. Less than 0.01% of the time I also get the DNG (so JPEG+DNG) and end up discard the DNG nearly 100% of the time.
Get it right in the camera and there is no need to use anything but JPEG. Of course, I always use the highest quality and highest
resolution JPEG available. I always did that with all my cameras: K-7, K20D, K10D and my non-Pentax ones too.

With JPEG, the camera produces an image immediately. You can shoot DNG or RAW and you'll have to do the transformation yourself
later, on a computer, while you are not doing photography... Sure you can get a different result but only if you work at it. If you use
the default conversion and batch-convert everything you just got the same JPEG as the camera.

You want to see what is possible with JPEG only, straight out of the camera, without processing, cropping, straighting or anything
else? Check my gallery of Guatemela, it is entirely done with the K-7. Other than the 4 panoramas, everything is as-shot using a K-7: http://www.neoluminance.com/query.php?gallery=Guatemala

- Itai
www.neoluminance.com

[alexeyga]

100% RAW

BRIDGE+ACR+PP (if needed) workflow...

Tried shooting RAW+JPG for a while, but it ended up being more of a hassle to manage... Faststone viewer is almost as fast with RAW files as with JPGs, so it takes the same amount of time to filter-out all the useless stuff and only then start processing... Even when I'm shooting something just for the "sake of having it", like quick snap-shots of a product for estimation, etc... I'd rather batch-process 'em through ACR than shoot straight JPG.

As far as straight JPG goes... makes no sense to me... I'm not saying OOC JPEG is bad... some cameras are capable of great JPG output, but why limit your-self if you don't have to?

[grey goat]

RAW

Specifically, I shoot DNG . . . Bridge, ACR, then PS CS3. (I'm thinking about Lightroom, though.)

I shot JPGs for the first week I had the K-7, then switched to RAW exclusively. I guess it's my nod to my years in a traditional darkroom. . . .

[Eruditass]

I went back and forth from RAW (I don't care about space) to RAW+ (too complicated of a workflow), to JPEG (easier workflow, plus K-x NR is good enough).

I now do RAW+ and have a workflow that is easier than other methods I've tried.

In lightroom I sort by extension, mark all RAWs as rejected, hide rejected, go to sort by capture time, and look at JPEGs. If there is a potential keeper that needs some RAW treatment, I show rejected, unreject, and re-hide.

After going through a set a couple times and having my keepers, picks, and rejects all marked, I remove them.

[ancatdubh]

k20 - raw + jpg

My reason for liking jpg along with the raw;

a) when browsing the windows directory, they are fast.

b) I have a liking for the in camera black and white (adjusted to high contrast), and for some reason silkypix takes the RAW shows it in that lovely black and white and then helpfully converts it back to colour (although I probably didn't want it in colour).

Anyhow, I like the posters idea above of getting it right in camera then there is no need for RAW in the immediacy of the photo shoot. The only thing i do believe is that there may be something that you want to do with your image in many years to come and if you've just the jpg then perhaps you won't have the image information to do whatever that may be (ie: x amount is discarded) so RAW in a way future proofs your artistic intent (that you don't even know you have as yet )