Best would be placing RGB images as PSD, if no transparency is included you can use JPG with high quality, if text and vectors are included it is best to use PDF.
If you need to place graphics or logos or any other vectors, use AI or PDF.
If you use PDF, you should prefer PDF/X-4.
Of all the formats that you can use for placing content into InDesign, PDF is generally the safest and least lossy.
You refer to “images” being placed into an InDesign document, but if those images contain text and/or vector, only PDF will preserve the text as text and vector as vector, especially if the content was originally saved from an unflattened Photoshop file. Obviously, if the placed “images” came from Illustrator or InDesign, PDF is likewise the format to use.
In the case of actual pure raster images (no text and no vector content) ...
If by “raw images” you are referring to raster images out of a digital camera in a RAW format, InDesign has no method of accommodating this. You must process the image from RAW to some other format first in Photoshop, Lightroom, etc.
If your raster image has a spot color channel, PDF is also the only way to preserve that information.
At this point, if those “images” are already PDF, leave them as-is and make decisions about any future content placement into InDesign independently.
One of the downsides to using .pdf for raster images is that if you lose the ability to see the effective resolution at a glance in the Links window. If you use .psd, .tif or .jpg, an image that has been scaled after being placed in InDesign will show the actual resolution (the resolution that was chosen in Photoshop), as well as the effective resolution (for example, a 300ppi image scaled to 200% will have an effective resolution of 150ppi, and will be 600ppi if scaled to 50%). Because a .pdf (or .eps) can be made with a combination of images, each with a different resolution, there is no way to say for sure what the effective resolution is for a .pdf without knowing the resolution of the image within the .pdf shell.