Prev: Hilarious!! B&H shipping charges for one roll of film!!!
Next: Lets call it, rating the rubbish
From: none on 25 Mar 2010 01:51
Just wondering if there is any performace difference in using a
micro SDHC card in a digital P&S camera that requires a full sized
SDHC card?


--
--------------------------------- --- -- -
Posted with NewsLeecher v3.9 Final
Web @ http://www.newsleecher.com/?usenet
------------------- ----- ---- -- -

From: Mike Russell on 26 Mar 2010 22:42
On 25 Mar 2010 05:51:41 GMT, none(a)none.com<Sam> wrote:

> Just wondering if there is any performace difference in using a
> micro SDHC card in a digital P&S camera that requires a full sized
> SDHC card?

No difference at all.
--
Mike Russell - http://www.curvemeister.com
From: NameHere on 27 Mar 2010 01:06
On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:42:38 -0700, Mike Russell
<groupsRE(a)MOVEcurvemeister.com> wrote:

>On 25 Mar 2010 05:51:41 GMT, none(a)none.com<Sam> wrote:
>
>> Just wondering if there is any performace difference in using a
>> micro SDHC card in a digital P&S camera that requires a full sized
>> SDHC card?
>
>No difference at all.

Wrong.

I found that cards rated at the same speed between SDHC and Micro-SDHC can
be quite a bit slower for write-speed in the Micro-SDHC package. I'm not
sure why though. You would think they'd both use the same chip just in a
different package. Perhaps they think that because most of them will be
used in MP3 players and cell-phones that write speed is not a top priority
for those devices.

There are some micro vs. standard SDHC benchmark tests on the following
page, though not in any easy-to read order. You'll have to find and compare
those which are tested under similar camera OS and CPU platforms to remove
those as being speed-test variables: Digic II, III, or IV (VxWorks vs.
DryOS OS's, Digic II is always VxWorks, Digic III can be either, and Digic
IV is DryOS.)

http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Benchmarks

See this page to sort out which platform is which

http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/For_Developers

Some enterprising OCD sufferer might want to make another list with further
cross-reference comparisons just to card type rather than camera type. This
is perhaps the best SDHC benchmark test page on the net because these are
all tested right in the cameras with an in-camera benchmark utility. There
is no card-reader, USB port, or operating system bottleneck to taint the
tests. Other than the camera's own OS and CPU bottleneck, that is. In any
case these are tested how well they perform right in a camera, where it
matters, not on your computer.

It would be so nice if you pretend-photographer trolls would type from
actual hands-on experience with all these things instead of imagined
fabrications and untested beliefs from what you read elsewhere on the net.
But then that's quite impossible for role-playing pretend-photographers who
can only make wild extrapolations from incomplete information, isn't it.

From: Mike Russell on 27 Mar 2010 05:15
On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 00:06:18 -0500, NameHere wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:42:38 -0700, Mike Russell
> <groupsRE(a)MOVEcurvemeister.com> wrote:
>
>>On 25 Mar 2010 05:51:41 GMT, none(a)none.com<Sam> wrote:
>>
>>> Just wondering if there is any performace difference in using a
>>> micro SDHC card in a digital P&S camera that requires a full sized
>>> SDHC card?
>>
>>No difference at all.
>
> Wrong.

yadda yadda snipped.

How about an example of a SD chipset that is slower, simply by virtue of
being in the smaller package size?

Didn't think so. Until you provide an example of such a chip, I'll stand
by my original response.
--
Mike Russell - http://www.curvemeister.com
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Hilarious!! B&H shipping charges for one roll of film!!!
Next: Lets call it, rating the rubbish