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: Peter on 4 Jul 2010 18:47 >> On 2010-07-04 09:35:42 -0700, Robert Coe <bob(a)1776.COM> said: >> >>> On 4 Jul 2010 14:03:10 GMT, ray <ray(a)zianet.com> 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. >>> >>> But the only reason for SD is to re-use the space reserved for the >>> CF slot. So >>> (quite understandably) only the largest cameras have both. >>> >>> Bob >> >> By having both slots on my D300s I have several options; >> when shooting at an air show or other event I have a 16 GB CF & a 16 >> GB SD with the SD acting as an overflow for a filled CF eliminating >> the need to change cards at critical moments. (not that I have many >> of those.) and that is my default set up. >> >> I also have a custom menu option set up for shooting in camera B&W >> where the B&W JPEG is routed to the SD card and RAW is written to >> the CF giving me the best of both Worlds. I also do this when >> shooting RAW + JPEG separating RAW & JPEG. The same goes for the few >> times I have played with video on the D300s. >> >> I still find SD cards too small for my phatt phyngrs. > > The also takes longer to change than a CF card. (Assuming you include the time it takes to find it.) BTW have you noticed any time difference in writing the buffer to the card, between CF & SD?
From: Peter on 4 Jul 2010 19:01 "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message news:2010070410294875249-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... > On 2010-07-04 09:21:14 -0700, Gary Edstrom <GEdstrom(a)PacBell.Net> said: > >> 2. Much less chance of bending pins inside the camera. > > I have been using CF for 11years and I haven't bent one yet. > >> >> First with DSLR cameras, the size factor really isn't important. A DSLR >> is going to be larger anyway than a small P&S. Not much to be gained in >> size by using a SD chip. > > Exactly > >> >> The second factor, while technically true, certainly has not been a >> problem with me. I have been shooting using CF cards for over 11 years >> now in 4 different cameras and have never bent a pin inside the camera >> while inserting the chip. > > I have the same experience with 5 cameras and three different readers, not > one bent pin. Not a smart thing to post. Hope Murphy doesn't rear his ugly head. -- Peter
From: Savageduck on 4 Jul 2010 19:54 On 2010-07-04 15:47:07 -0700, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> said: >>> On 2010-07-04 09:35:42 -0700, Robert Coe <bob(a)1776.COM> said: >>> >>>> On 4 Jul 2010 14:03:10 GMT, ray <ray(a)zianet.com> 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. >>>> >>>> But the only reason for SD is to re-use the space reserved for the >>>> CF slot. So >>>> (quite understandably) only the largest cameras have both. >>>> >>>> Bob >>> >>> By having both slots on my D300s I have several options; >>> when shooting at an air show or other event I have a 16 GB CF & a 16 >>> GB SD with the SD acting as an overflow for a filled CF eliminating >>> the need to change cards at critical moments. (not that I have many >>> of those.) and that is my default set up. >>> >>> I also have a custom menu option set up for shooting in camera B&W >>> where the B&W JPEG is routed to the SD card and RAW is written to >>> the CF giving me the best of both Worlds. I also do this when >>> shooting RAW + JPEG separating RAW & JPEG. The same goes for the few >>> times I have played with video on the D300s. >>> >>> I still find SD cards too small for my phatt phyngrs. >> >> > The also takes longer to change than a CF card. (Assuming you include > the time it takes to find it.) > > BTW have you noticed any time difference in writing the buffer to the > card, between CF & SD? Not really, I am using SanDisk UDMA 60MB/s CF as primary, and SanDisk Extreme III 30MB/s SDHC as secondary. I mainly shoot RAW only, and when I have shot RAW+JPEG using both I have not perceived any time difference. The same applies for the few times it switched to the SDHC because the CF was full, the switch was seamless with no apparent change at all, even with the spec difference between the two cards. That makes me wonder what I am buying the UDMA cards for??? -- Regards, Savageduck
From: Savageduck on 4 Jul 2010 19:58 On 2010-07-04 16:01:26 -0700, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> said: > "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message > news:2010070410294875249-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... >> On 2010-07-04 09:21:14 -0700, Gary Edstrom <GEdstrom(a)PacBell.Net> said: >> > >>> 2. Much less chance of bending pins inside the camera. >> >> I have been using CF for 11years and I haven't bent one yet. >> >>> >>> First with DSLR cameras, the size factor really isn't important. A DSLR >>> is going to be larger anyway than a small P&S. Not much to be gained in >>> size by using a SD chip. >> >> Exactly >> >>> >>> The second factor, while technically true, certainly has not been a >>> problem with me. I have been shooting using CF cards for over 11 years >>> now in 4 different cameras and have never bent a pin inside the camera >>> while inserting the chip. >> >> I have the same experience with 5 cameras and three different readers, >> not one bent pin. > > > Not a smart thing to post. > Hope Murphy doesn't rear his ugly head. Murphy wore himself out on so many other things in this house, he moved next door. -- Regards, Savageduck
From: Peter on 4 Jul 2010 20:46
"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message news:2010070416544711272-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... > On 2010-07-04 15:47:07 -0700, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> said: > >>>> On 2010-07-04 09:35:42 -0700, Robert Coe <bob(a)1776.COM> said: >>>> >>>>> On 4 Jul 2010 14:03:10 GMT, ray <ray(a)zianet.com> 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. >>>>> >>>>> But the only reason for SD is to re-use the space reserved for the >>>>> CF slot. So >>>>> (quite understandably) only the largest cameras have both. >>>>> >>>>> Bob >>>> >>>> By having both slots on my D300s I have several options; >>>> when shooting at an air show or other event I have a 16 GB CF & a 16 >>>> GB SD with the SD acting as an overflow for a filled CF eliminating >>>> the need to change cards at critical moments. (not that I have many >>>> of those.) and that is my default set up. >>>> >>>> I also have a custom menu option set up for shooting in camera B&W >>>> where the B&W JPEG is routed to the SD card and RAW is written to >>>> the CF giving me the best of both Worlds. I also do this when >>>> shooting RAW + JPEG separating RAW & JPEG. The same goes for the few >>>> times I have played with video on the D300s. >>>> >>>> I still find SD cards too small for my phatt phyngrs. >>> >>> >> The also takes longer to change than a CF card. (Assuming you include >> the time it takes to find it.) >> >> BTW have you noticed any time difference in writing the buffer to the >> card, between CF & SD? > > Not really, I am using SanDisk UDMA 60MB/s CF as primary, and SanDisk > Extreme III 30MB/s SDHC as secondary. I mainly shoot RAW only, and when I > have shot RAW+JPEG using both I have not perceived any time difference. > The same applies for the few times it switched to the SDHC because the CF > was full, the switch was seamless with no apparent change at all, even > with the spec difference between the two cards. > That makes me wonder what I am buying the UDMA cards for??? > -- That occurred to me. I have not noticed any real difference between UDMA and an ordinary CF card. -- Peter |