Awesome. But honestly, RAW = 30 megs per shot? At what point do you consider not shooting RAW? - Stephen Mack

Yeah - I hear you. The problem is that I never know until afterwards if I'm going to really like the shot or not. I like to have the extra resolution and color information for shots that I really like. For shots I don't like at all I can learn to delete. The problem is the shots that I only sort-of like. For those shots, I'm still holding on to 30 MB forever. I guess I could downsample and only keep a smaller version... - Brian Johns

Just RAW, or RAW+JPG. You didn't need all that space on your 32GB CF Card, right? - Neal Krummell

I only shoot RAW, since I can make JPGs later. (shooting RAW + JPG would just make the problem worse!) And no, I don't have 32 GB cards! I'm thinking of upgrading to a pair of 16 GB cards but am holding off for now since it's not a real "need". - Brian Johns

The problem with RAW is that you can only take a few shots until you run out of space. The quality is great, but if you don't carry extra cards around you'll run out of film. - Davis Freeberg

"a few" being about 500 or 600 at this point. :-) The other part of the problem is the processing and storage after the shoot. But yet when you get that really great 5-star image and make a 20 x 30 print of it, it all feels worthwhile. - Brian Johns

So how many 20x30 prints have you made in the last few months? Just curious! - Stephen Mack

When I took the printing workshop from Charlie Cramer back in June, quite a few. (10 or so.) If I weren't actually making large prints, then the huge filesize would be a total waste of space. Many people like Nikon's approach better, which is making full-frame cameras with 12 megapixels. Better image quality and smaller files FTW. I wish Canon would stop trying to win the megapixel race too. - Brian Johns

I made a decent 20x30 print from my XTi at only 10MP. $10 a print from Costco made for a nice test run. - Neal Krummell