But why get yourself a 5D3 to shoot JPEG? There must have been a bazillion words written in the RAW vs JPEG debate and the pro-RAW conclusions remain totally valid.
Frankly it freaks me out to shoot JPEG on any camera other than my phone...the potential for post-pro grief makes it a non-starter. If you know for 100% certain your output requirements are modest, check out mRAW.
I bought 2 5D3s to shoot JPEG only. I have shot RAW exclusively for years and edited probably over 100,000 RAW and JPEG images. RAW is really only a benefit to me when I miss the exposure or WB. Sure RAW captures a lot more information but if you don't need that information then it is a waste. I shoot 20-30 weddings a year and probably shoot 3000-5000 pictures per wedding and a good JPEG is just as good as a RAW image unless your settings are off or you plan on doing extensive dodging or burning. If you shoot manual and dial in the WB using the Kelvin color temperature and the WB shift to properly balance the color of the light source your JPEG is going to be as good if not better than if it were taken in RAW.
Why shoot 5000 photos at one wedding?
Not saying what you are doing is wrong, I'm just genuinely curious. I usually take about 1000 per wedding, and I feel that is a lot. How many photos go into an album you make?
5000 photos would kill my workflow. It would take too much time. Time = money, so less photos means more money.
So, just curious why you shoot so many? How many keepers do you get out of that 5k?
I am usually shooting for 12 hours with few breaks. I deliver between 1200-1800 edited pictures for the client. It takes me about 8-10 hours to cull and edit a wedding.