This post is not intended to start a flame war on the overall merits of shooting RAW vs jpeg. Rather, it is a serious inquiry about the ability of the Olympus engine to extract detail out of an image. Since getting my OM-D, I seem to frequently arrive at a problem: the JPEGs often seem to extract better detail from the camera than Lightroom in RAW. I don't mean this in the sense of sharpness and resolution; LR is obviously vastly superior at producing the sharpest possible images and better overall at noise reduction. However, when it comes to reproducing subtle tones and gradations, Oly seems to win over RAWs supposedly better headroom. Note that I'm not concerning myself too much with color; I do prefer Olympus' jpeg colors to Adobe's interpretation, but that is largely irrelevant as I use a variety of custom presets and alterations to VSCO filters on both RAW and JPEG. Rather, there have just been too many times where I open a RAW and jpeg side by side in LR and all the slider pulling in the world doesn't seem to best Olympus' interpretation of tones. It's funny because while Olympus is known to underexpose and then pull up the image to protect the highlights(which works admittedly well), I notice the benefits of the Olympus engine primarily in the shadow and midtone parts of the image, where Olympus seems to extract a lot more detail. It's often been the case then, when I don't expect an image to become a large print, that I prefer to actually apply post processing directly onto the JPEG instead of RAW, at the expense of some pixel level sharpness and color fidelity. If I really want to be serious, I'll process the image in Olympus viewer and then convert it into a 16 bit TIFF to import into LR. For some reason this doesn't retain the same highlight headroom, but it keeps more color information. Has anyone else noticed this? I'll update the thread later with samples, but it's very obvious to me when shooting scenes with high dynamic range. The JPEGs somehow seem to manage to extract more shadow detail than even shifting LR's sliders by 100, without introducing nearly as much noise. I feel like I'd need to exposure bracket and do HDR to get the same gradations from ACR. I guess it's just weird to me. Most people who shoot jpegs do it because they don't like post processing. Shooting jpegs for me still involves just as much post, but it also seems to provide better images for less work 90% of the time. Oftentimes when working on an important print, I'll use RAW to extract maximum resolution, but have the JPEG open to use as a reference. EDIT: Some sample images on page 2. Click here.