PhotosGuy wrote in post #5725144
I would take issue with your basis for saying that. To me, "Because the RAW converter used a different JPEG compression setting than the camera did when saving the JPEG."
means the image contains more information, so is a higher quality.
So I'll keep shooting RAW, regardless of your reasoning.
If you take the same image and save it at 2 different compression levels then the larger file is theoretically better. There comes a point, however, when increasing the file size makes no visible difference. The size of images produced by a Canon camera in max quality JPEG mode is almost certainly beyond that point, so the fact that you can make a larger JPEG from a RAW file is meaningless. If you're worried about that sort of thing, then save as TIFF.
You've often tried to suggest that the fact that your JPEGs from RAW files are bigger than the ones from the camera means that they must contain more data. This is absolutely not true. I can take a blurred photo with poor contrast (in RAW) and save it as a larger file than a sharp, high contrast JPEG from the camera. JPEG file size is almost completely irrelevant to the RAW vs JPEG discussion.
By the way - I shoot RAW pretty much 100% of the time and would hate to be forced to shoot JPEGs. The compression level of the in-camera JPEGs, however, has nothing to do with it.