Thanks for asking !
I'm not going through the 63 other answers, comments, and rants. Much has probably been said and argued already. So I'll restrict myself to a few essential thoughts.

1. The JPEG is not at all an inferior" format in general. Its clever compression is very valuable and good enough for any image which doesn't need extensive corrections in exposure or color. Set to a high quality while saving or generating the JPEG does remove image data, and this difference is measurable, but the effect is not visible to the naked eye.
2. Many publishing software generates PDF files with hi-res and hi-quality JPEG imagery inside of it. If it would be that bad, viewers of various kinds of media would surely have complained.

So if you're a photographer whose photos are good enough to serve as the required end result, then JPEG is just fine.

Maybe the new HEIF format might turn out a better alternative to JPEG (and many other formats), but it isn't a commonly accepted standard, yet.


Oorspronkelijk geplaatst op Quora: Why do photographers with expensive DSLR cameras ever choose to shoot inferior .jpg format instead of RAW?"