Why DSLR still use CF card?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: A little nostalgia this morning thinking of old dad
Next: There's an app for that: NNTP news reader for Android
From: George Kerby on 5 Jul 2010 21:05 On 7/5/10 12:47 PM, in article 89ek5hF852U19(a)mid.individual.net, "ray" <ray(a)zianet.com> wrote: > On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 11:48:32 -0500, George Kerby wrote: > >> On 7/5/10 9:42 AM, in article 89e9afF852U17(a)mid.individual.net, "ray" >> <ray(a)zianet.com> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 06:33:42 -0500, Neil wrote: >>> >>>> On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 14:03:10 +0000, ray wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 01:10:42 -0700, james wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> SDxx card have equaled or bettered CF card. Is there a good reason >>>>>> why high end DSLRs still use CF cards? This actually seems like a >>>>>> turn-off, not a feature. >>>>> >>>>> I think one significant reason is that many purchasers are repeat >>>>> buyers - they already HAVE CF cards. IMHO - best route is to make a >>>>> camera capable of using CF and SD.����O$ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Who can afford A Canon eos 1Ds mk111 ? My pension won't run to it. >>> >>> Mine would, but I eschew Canon. >> >> Because? > > Because they have no support for Linux, I choose to not use their > products and support folks who do. So you don't use their hardware because it doesn't fit your software? Man, that is something I never would have guessed. BTW: I don't use the software either, but that doesn't keep me from using the best hardware products on the market.
From: George Kerby on 5 Jul 2010 21:09 On 7/5/10 2:00 PM, in article 89eoetF852U21(a)mid.individual.net, "ray" <ray(a)zianet.com> wrote: > On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 11:27:13 -0700, otter wrote: > >> On Jul 5, 12:47?pm, ray <r...(a)zianet.com> wrote: >>> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 11:48:32 -0500, George Kerby wrote: >>>> On 7/5/10 9:42 AM, in article 89e9afF852...(a)mid.individual.net, "ray" >>>> <r...(a)zianet.com> wrote: >>> >>>>> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 06:33:42 -0500, Neil wrote: >>> >>>>>> On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 14:03:10 +0000, ray wrote: >>> >>>>>>> On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 01:10:42 -0700, james wrote: >>> >>>>>>>> SDxx card have equaled or bettered CF card. Is there a good >>>>>>>> reason why high end DSLRs still use CF cards? This actually seems >>>>>>>> like a turn-off, not a feature. >>> >>>>>>> I think one significant reason is that many purchasers are repeat >>>>>>> buyers - they already HAVE CF cards. IMHO - best route is to make >>>>>>> a camera capable of using CF and SD.����O$ >>> >>>>>> Who can afford A Canon eos 1Ds mk111 ? My pension won't run to it. >>> >>>>> Mine would, but I eschew Canon. >>> >>>> Because? >>> >>> Because they have no support for Linux, I choose to not use their >>> products and support folks who do.- Hide quoted text - >>> >>> - Show quoted text - >> >> What Canon software do you really need to use? I use Adobe to import >> RAW files from the camera, through the rest of the post-processing. Not >> sure how well Photoshop works on Linux, but there is always GIMP. My >> point is, though, you don't need to run any Canon software if you have a >> Canon camera. > > Exactly correct. Canon makes other products besides cameras - for example > printers - a great many of which make decent boat anchors, but thats' > about it. When they support their product line in Linux, I'll consider > their products. > > For the record, I routinely use ufraw and or dcraw and process further > with GIMP (ufraw processing is usually sufficient). I'm in the habit of > throwing away the CD's that come with computer peripherals - I know there > will be nothing of use there - it's generally included with the OS anyway. Yes. I will agree. Printers are the exception. I am in agreement: Canon should stay with video/photo products but so be it...
From: ray on 5 Jul 2010 22:22 On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 20:05:09 -0500, George Kerby wrote: > On 7/5/10 12:47 PM, in article 89ek5hF852U19(a)mid.individual.net, "ray" > <ray(a)zianet.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 11:48:32 -0500, George Kerby wrote: >> >>> On 7/5/10 9:42 AM, in article 89e9afF852U17(a)mid.individual.net, "ray" >>> <ray(a)zianet.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 06:33:42 -0500, Neil wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 14:03:10 +0000, ray wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 01:10:42 -0700, james wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> SDxx card have equaled or bettered CF card. Is there a good reason >>>>>>> why high end DSLRs still use CF cards? This actually seems like a >>>>>>> turn-off, not a feature. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think one significant reason is that many purchasers are repeat >>>>>> buyers - they already HAVE CF cards. IMHO - best route is to make a >>>>>> camera capable of using CF and SD.ÐøO$ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Who can afford A Canon eos 1Ds mk111 ? My pension won't run to it. >>>> >>>> Mine would, but I eschew Canon. >>> >>> Because? >> >> Because they have no support for Linux, I choose to not use their >> products and support folks who do. > > So you don't use their hardware because it doesn't fit your software? I don't use their hardware because of philosophical differences. I was greatly turned off a number of years ago with a Canon winprinter. > > Man, that is something I never would have guessed. > > BTW: I don't use the software either, but that doesn't keep me from > using the best hardware products on the market. If I felt I were severely constrained, I might possibly rethink my position - no evidence so far that I am.
From: nospam on 5 Jul 2010 23:22 In article <8739vxv65f.fld(a)apaflo.com>, Floyd L. Davidson <floyd(a)apaflo.com> wrote: > His gain though, and ours, would be if they did support > Linux. linux users might benefit but the rest of the users (which is vastly greater in number) will lose. resources are limited. if a company puts their efforts into supporting linux, that means they'll have less resources available for developing other features that will benefit a larger number of users. > They don't, so there is little reason to support > them simply because there are virtually always other > products from companies that do support Linux. you have a nikon camera, they don't support linux but you bought it anyway.
From: Paul Furman on 6 Jul 2010 01:01
Robert Coe wrote: > On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 17:37:33 -0400, "Neil Harrington"<nobody(a)homehere.net> > wrote: > : > : "Gary Edstrom"<GEdstrom(a)PacBell.Net> wrote in message > : news:4qc136hpdtfolfdg2t8scu5tikl3ubq8bk(a)4ax.com... > :> On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 01:10:42 -0700, "james"<nospam(a)nospam.com> wrote: > :> > :>>SDxx card have equaled or bettered CF card. Is there a good reason why > :>>high > :>>end DSLRs still use CF cards? This actually seems like a turn-off, not a > :>>feature. > :> > :> Well, SD cards do have two advantages over CF cards: > :> 1. Size and > :> 2. Much less chance of bending pins inside the camera. > : > : I've read of that happening (bending pins) but I'm damned if I can see how > : it's possible. In every camera I own that takes CF cards, the card is guided > : so well into the camera, and the pin ends I presume are beveled, . . . how > : can any pins get bent? I am reasonably clumsy but have never bent any CF > : pins. > > I've done it in a crappy card reader. Ditto... after about 8 years... |