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: otter on 5 Jul 2010 14:27 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.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.- 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.
From: Alan Lichtenstein on 5 Jul 2010 14:55 Bruce wrote: > On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 12:57:13 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein <arl(a)erols.com> > wrote: > >>You wouldn't buy the camera anyway, because it's a compact dSLR. I >>bought my wife an Olympus SP590-UZ, and it has only one slot. > > > > The Olympus SP590-UZ is **NOT** a DSLR. > > Olympus characterizes the camera as simply a digital camera. Since it has virtually all the features of an SLR, adding that designation, as per the quote below hardly seems out of place. I won't split hairs with you. If you want to simply call it a compact SLR, or simply an Advanced Compact, as the literature appears to indicate. that's fine with me. However, you should be aware that these cameras have a good number of the features that full size DSLR's have. I won't get involved in a discussion designed to split hairs regarding the nomenclature designation, because that's a pointless discussion which centers on semantics. However, you should be aware that DP, in its buyer's guide, and in articles where they have been evaluated by specific camera, classifies them as Advanced Compacts, with this description: "Full featured compacts have the controls of a DSLR, including choice of exposure modes, both auto and manual, auto and manual focus, full control of ISO and complete choice of white balance...The only thing they don't have from a functional point of view is interchangeable lenses." Given that, one can say that if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, it probably is a duck. Well, almost, given the fact that there are differences. Since the manufacturer characterizes it as a digital camera, with all the features of a DSLR, and the literature asserts they have virtually all the features of an SLR as well, it does appear that the characterization compact DSLR could be quite aptly applied to these cameras. However, if you want to stand on the fact that they are different in a small technical manner from a true DSLR, despite the fact that they have all the equivalent functions, you're right and I won't argue with you, and I'll close with letting you be right, if that's important.
From: ray on 5 Jul 2010 15:00 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.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.- 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.
From: Ofnuts on 5 Jul 2010 15:43 On 05/07/2010 19:47, ray 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. Because the others camera manufacturers support Linux? -- Bertrand
From: RichB on 5 Jul 2010 16:15
On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 12:57:13 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein <arl(a)erols.com> wrote: >Allen wrote: >> Alan Lichtenstein wrote: >> <snip> >> >>> >>> As far as the difference between SD and CF, never having used SD, I >>> can't speak intelligently about that, except that I purchased a >>> compact SLR for my wife, who is photographically challenged, and uses >>> a micro SD card. Since I do all the changing, size is a factor, and >>> I'm not thrilled with the micro card. In particular storing a filled >>> card in the field. They're so small, they're easy to lose, even with >>> the card reader that I use as a storage unit since it is less likely >>> to get lost. I suppose the SD would be only slightly better. >> >> >> Please tell us what camera uses only a Micro SD card, so I can avoid it >> like plague-carrying fleas. I have no problem with standard-size SDs, >> but a Micro not enclosed in a full-size adapter would be an absolute >> nightmare for me. >> Allen > >You wouldn't buy the camera anyway, because it's a compact dSLR. I >bought my wife an Olympus SP590-UZ, and it has only one slot. The >manual says it can take either an Olympus XD card, or a microSD card >with the enclosed adapter. Newer Olympus cameras XD formats are >supposed to be compatible with SD,although, I use the microSD card for >my wife's camera, because third-party cards are cheaper and for her >purposes, are fine. All cameras can use a Micro-SD card. I use a Micro to standard SD adapter. I also use Micro-SD in a Sony Memory-Stick-Pro-only camera with similar adapters. Greatly increasing its original 2G storage capacity limit as well. |