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: Gary Edstrom on 4 Jul 2010 14:21 On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 10:29:48 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote: >On 2010-07-04 09:21:14 -0700, Gary Edstrom <GEdstrom(a)PacBell.Net> said: >> >> [snip] >> >> The big advantage with staying with CF is that many people out there, >> like myself, have quite an arsenal of CF chips and don't want to be >> forced to buy different chips when buying a new camera. It's like one >> of the big reasons for choosing a Canon 50D when I upgraded from the 20D >> for me was that I didn't want to have to buy a whole new set of lenses. >> The same can hold for CF chips. >> >> Gary > >Another point of agreement. However some of those early CF cards are of >such small capacity, they gather dust today. I know what you are saying! My oldest CF card is only 16MB. That MIGHT be enough to hold a single RAW picture from my 50D. It is still perfectly good, however. I hate to get rid of anything that still works, no matter how obsolete. I should probably take it down to our E-Waste center. The same goes for a bunch of other junk I have...The down side of being a computer geek...I have two old computers ready for e-waste right now, with another two ready after the end of the year. That would STILL leave me with two functioning computers: One belonging to my employer, and one to me. Gary
From: John McWilliams on 4 Jul 2010 14:29 Gary Edstrom wrote: > On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 10:29:48 -0700, Savageduck > <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote: > >> On 2010-07-04 09:21:14 -0700, Gary Edstrom <GEdstrom(a)PacBell.Net> said: >> >>> 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 >> Nope, I prefer to have a less finicky, less likely to drop from my >> clumsy fingers. I use SD in my G11 and in the 2nd slot in my D300s for >> jpeg seperation. RAW going to CF, JPEG to SD. > > [snip] > > That brings me to a related topic: The design of products for use by > people who have less than perfect use of their hands. > > Back about 5 years ago, I bought a new television for my mother as her > previous one had given out and was MUCH too old to be worth repairing. > Of course, the remote control that came with the new set had numerous > tiny buttons on it. I went to the local electronics store to buy a > remote with larger buttons just for the basic functions. I just > couldn't seem to get the idea across to the young sales clerk that some > people, like my mother, are intimidated by numerous buttons and just > don't have the dexterity anymore to push the tiny buttons on the > original remote. I searched around on my own and found one that had big > buttons, and just the basic functions: On/Off, Channel, and Volume. I > took it and showed it to the sales clerk telling him that this was what > I was looking for. He still couldn't grasp the concept of someone > having reduced dexterity and being intimidated by a lot of controls. Perhaps he'd reached his level of incompetence as a sales clerk..... -- John McWilliams
From: Outing Trolls is FUN! on 4 Jul 2010 14:46 On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 17:35:51 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg <ozcvgtt02(a)sneakemail.com> wrote: >james <nospam(a)nospam.com> wrote: >> SDxx card have equaled or bettered CF card. > >That's news to me. > >Pray tell, how many revisions of the SD card specs will it >take to reach the capacity limits of the CF card, and how >many incompatible or problematic changes will that cause? > >> Is there a good reason why high >> end DSLRs still use CF cards? This actually seems like a turn-off, not a >> feature. > >Except for the read-only tab (which is of little use in >cameras) there is nothing an SD card can do better, and lots >it can do worse. Try handling SD cards in thick gloves, just >for fun. > >-Wolfgang What does it matter to you? You don't even own a camera that uses any card format.
From: Better Info on 4 Jul 2010 15:03 On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 09:21:14 -0700, Gary Edstrom <GEdstrom(a)PacBell.Net> wrote: >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. > >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. Except for those times that you are on an extended photo trek and you run out of storage space. Then you realize ... Hey! Those SD cards that I have in my MP3 player for songs and GPS for supplemental maps have about 20G of extra room! I can always replace all those map files and song and audio-book files later. What I can't replace is this moment in time for these photos of rare plants and animals that I may never find nor see again. I've had to do this before so I know how handy it can be having extra SD memory in your other always-take-along devices.
From: Paul Furman on 4 Jul 2010 15:25
nospam wrote: > In article<nbm6g7-ua5.ln1(a)ID-52418.user.berlin.de>, Wolfgang > Weisselberg<ozcvgtt02(a)sneakemail.com> wrote: > >> Except for the read-only tab (which is of little use in >> cameras) there is nothing an SD card can do better, and lots >> it can do worse. Try handling SD cards in thick gloves, just >> for fun. > > sd cards are immune to bent pins since there aren't any pins to bend in > either the card or the card cage. yea i know, you've been using cf for > decades and never had a bent pin. go ask a camera repair shop how often > it occurs. it's funny how the first thing they do when a customer has a > problem with a camera is look into the slot. you don't see them doing > that with sd. > > sd cards are more resistant to moisture than cf since there are no > holes along the bottom. > > sd card cages are physically smaller which means smaller and lighter > cameras (which a lot of people want) or more room for other stuff in a > same size camera (which other people prefer). they're also less > expensive which means the cameras can be less expensive as well (or the > same price with more features). > > sd cards are vastly more popular, which means prices are lower, > especially when they go on sale. i rarely see cf cards on sale, but i > often see sd cards practically given away for free. Probably makes sense now and some *are* only SD now but I have 2 CF cameras for the time being & none of those other devices. My old P&S uses 'Smart' Media <g> cell phone has no card, I only have a cassette in my car <g>. OTOH I missed VCRs entirely. |