Usually, depending on the amount of noise, lossless compression might not compress your data much, but if you discuss with your people on the other end what kind of pre-filtering they will perform on your data, you could do that processing on your side before sending them the images.
Similarily, make sure that they absolutely NEED the resolution at which you acquired the images. If they can afford to downsample the data by 2, then you should do this before as well.
As a simple example, I have tried this on a 512x512 3 channel image, here are my results
RAW as TIFF: 772KB RAW as LZWTIFF: 211KB RAW as JPEG2000: 166KB
After a Median Filter of radius 2
as TIFF: 772KB as LZWTIFF: 113KB as JPEG2000: 59KB
Some notes, make sure that you select Lossless JPEG2000 as it also has a lossy compression.
Finally This paper on lossy image compression for scientific data is interesting. In short:
- Depending on what will be analyzed, you could compress your data in a lossy way, once.
- If bandwidth is truly an issue, I would recommend that your people on the other side run a few analyses on both lossy and non-lossy data and compare the results, then conclude for this particular usage case.
On your point of saving everything in RAW and THEN making a ZIP file, because each image will have metadata associated with it, you will gain a slight bit more compression than if you just compress the pixel data image by image. Zip compression indeed lossless, and usually makes use of the DEFLATE algorithm.