Nikon has it. Canon has it. I just want to know how they can remove information when RAW data is supposed to be directly from the sensor. I mean, there's 12 million pixels on my D300, and I expect there to be enough information to explain what "pixel value" was recorded by all 12 MP on the sensor when the photo was taken. Should I use a "compressed RAW" format, or is there no point in doing so? My Nikon D300 can record in: - uncompressed RAW - lossless compressed RAW (saves 20-40% on file size, but quality stays the same) - lossy compressed RAW (saves around 40-60% space, but quality diminishes......WTF?) I have been shooting Large Fine JPEGs, and lossless compressed RAW. I haven't really tried them all out to see if there's a huge difference while editing, but I certainly do see a difference in file size, so I shoot lossless compressed RAW to save space, but maintain quality. If I'm going to shoot in lossy compressed RAW, I may as well just save the images as an optimal quality JPEG or something, right?