Nick Carrigan: Sorry DPReview but you haven't convinced me to shoot in RAW.
You've claimed that shooting in JPEG is a terrible experience. Could it also be a fact that certain companies just have a poor JPEG engine design?
Olympus has created a truly excellent JPEG engine. It isn't just in the XZ-1 but also the E-P/E-PL series as well. Why can't other manufacturer's do this?
Most P&S cameras have awful JPEG engines that can't even compete with an Apple iPhone image. If Apple can make this work, then certainly a *camera* company should be able to -- (a leer towards Canon/Nikon.)
If everyone would invest the time to create a good JPEG engine then RAW mode really wouldn't be necessary for the average user. Sure, RAW has some advantages but it shouldn't be a requirement to justify the camera's IQ.
Personally, I find it sad when I read a review that says "well, the JPEG engine sucks but RAW is great. So, we'll give it a Gold award."
To my mind comparing Raw with JPEG equates to comparing Negative with Polaroid - Lightroom has been the most rewarding investment I've made; simultaneously simplifying and accelerating my "workflow" managing my files, cataloging and, with .DNG, embedding descriptive metadata into the files themselves, applying image adjustments and embedding them non-destructively. If one's serious enough about photography to invest in a raw capable camara then I see little excuse for overlooking raw's (DNG's) numerous advantages.