Quote Originally Posted by russj
What is the opinion here, I'm using am EOS 300D and have been experimenting with the JPEG from the camera at full quality, and converting the RAW with Phaseone C1 software. In my opinion, the quality from RAW is better, but the difference is subtle. I would imagine the printed results would be indistinguishable from each other. If your like me, i cannot accept shooting on an inferior format, even if the differences are minute! ;)
It depends on your software. I don't have a 300D (yet).
Take this with a large pinch of salt, OK?

Using a Minolta A1 and A2, the JPG files produced from the supplied software out of a .RAW file is 50% larger than the JPG files produced in-camera.
The algorithm used is different, and I saw in one web review that the resolution was better (in lines per mm) and moire interference was reduced - all by usinng RAW and converting to JPG on the computer.

Disadvantages?
Size: I needed to buy another 1GB memory card.
Weight: I need to carry a laptop with me on a high volumne shooting day (F1 races).
Poor in-camera preview: it won't Zoom a RAW image, so I can't check focus by magnifying up to x8 on the rear screen to see if I've got the manual focus spot on.

Advantages?
Quality: I can (just) see the difference between the two on-screen at 1:1 pixel
Latitude: RAW files are at full sensor resolution, so I can adjust ISO in software
Balance: RAW files can be white-balanced after shooting using the supplied software

Now having said all that, I don't know how much applies to the 300D.
But I hope it gives you things to look for and try out for yourself.