Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Fujifilm

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 8, 2003, 8:13 AM   #41
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 13
Default

[quote="voxmagna"]
Quote:
I was having a problem with SM cards when deleting pix with my computer
I too was deleting all pix files in the Fuji directory of the SM card through the PNY multicard USB2 reader I have connected to my xp system using explorer. 1st use of the SM card and then delete and it would show the !CARD ERROR! message. Now, I did not try this with the 128MB SM cards but, using the 16MB SM card that came with the camera I reformatted the card through the reader using the format disk command in explorer choosing the FAT option. Then reinserting into the camera using the camera's menu system (while the !CARD ERROR! message is still displayed) to go through playback mode to get to the erase - format option. After formatting, everything went back to normal.

I get the impression from your reply that this may not work for me all the time :?:
Mr.B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 8, 2003, 9:51 AM   #42
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

Mr.B .... you're posting in 2 places. I've replied here:

http://www.stevesforums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=7125

When you format in your pc, even FAT16, it puts MSDOS code in the format header on the first sector which tells a system reading it to expect MSDOS 5.0(?) compatible format. The format also defines the number of clusters which varies with card size. However, what the pc format defaults to and what a SM is supplied as and the cam expects, might not be consistent but I can't remember if they were different.

My last 64Mb CF card was formatted as 2048 clusters when new. I can change it to 1024 but not 512, and it can still work with either cluster size for MP3 but not Fuji. I can wipe most of the first sector and the cam will still read the card. Curiously this card branded as Viking, contains a Toshiba name in the header. So we know where that one came from!

If you start with a totally clean new card and format in cam, this MSDOS data is absent and there is just a small bit of Fuji code. Why would Fuji want to pay money to Bill G and lock into MS authored code, when they can stick with an age old FAT spec? I'm not sure what XP is doing on delete but my Win98SE (FAT32) is fine. I suspect that it's changing the FAT structure on the card, as opposed to just overwriting the file entry.

You said you have SM cards where you can't delete files in your pc without errors. I'm trying to eliminate things, I block delete files all the time in my reader - and don't have any probs at all.
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 8, 2003, 12:16 PM   #43
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,544
Default

Quote:
Curiously this card branded as Viking, contains a Toshiba name in the header. So we know where that one came from!
Exactly with Samsung being the biggest of them all, and private labeled the cards to everyone.

Almost if not all all the cards 'manufacturers' are just too small or have enough financial backing to even afford a microelectronic fab, let alone fabs that'll have to be continuously rebuild to make smaller and smaller geometries!!! :lol:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2003, 3:52 AM   #44
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

NHL... That's right, and is why I maintain that a 'brand name' card might work very well in your cam today, but tomorrow they source from another manufacturer, different fab process and it doesn't. So recommending brands is flawed.

I'd like to know how traceable a card design is to a fab spec. - even when branded and supplied by the fabricator? It seems we look at cards as XYMb and now a speed version, but that doesn't always guarantee compatibility.
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2003, 6:14 AM   #45
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,544
Default

Vox

Quote:
I'd like to know how traceable a card design is to a fab spec. - even when branded and supplied by the fabricator?
... Well they usually try to hide this (product differentiator as they say it in the business) :lol: :lol: :lol:

But for theses: http://www.toshiba.com/taec/componen...lashseries.pdf
Quote:
o Blank front/back panels ready for OEM (tracking info laser marked on edge of card)
Also check this out:
Quote:
o Certified in accordance with CompactFlash Certification Plan
So thoses Viking should do no worse than others 'Toshiba' branded cards!


... Now who certify the cameras to the CompactFlash Certification Plan? ops: ops: ops:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 11, 2003, 11:56 PM   #46
Member
 
MikeC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 36
Default

My dad always said, "Life is tough and then you die."

I can understand and appreciate the hollow feeling after buying a CF card and thinking it will do a good job at a low price .... a real bummer if you end up with a card that does not work .... what do they cost these days .... $40-50 on ebay ? Hmmm I'm lucky I guess, my 128 MB CF card has not caused a single problem to date.

Good luck on getting it resolved .... the sooner that happens, the sooner you can enjoy unfettered the fun of using the S602.
MikeC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 17, 2003, 11:19 PM   #47
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19
Default

Quote:
Because the camera uses both Compact Flash and Smart Media I bought a 256 PNY CF card and that gives me a capacity of 424 shots at 3m normal quality rating.
[/quote
__________
Can you tell me how those numbers are arrived at? I need to understand all that talk about 3Mb shots and its relation to compression.
dennis luz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 20, 2003, 10:26 AM   #48
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

Dennis luz....Nobody came back to you so here's a quick answer. Reducing resolution is a sort of compression i.e starting with max your cam sensor will do, then throwing pixels away, is a bit like re-sampling to push your big pic files over the net. Your cam will have options for these different resolutions look at it like fine grain (the cams max) and coarse grain film.

What we really mean by compression, is converting a scene (at a certain resolution) to a JPEG file by using processing and estimation techniques to 'squeeze' the data. Then expanding the file back to the original file in our pc's. This is how you save card memory space.

Doing this is like having a gas pedal in your car - more compression smaller files, or less compression files nearly as big as the original file. Try saving an image file on your pc as a JPEG at different % compression, then go and have a look at the file sizes, and what the pic looks like.

Now cam makers DON'T offer users a variable % (real pity). They preset % compression with labels like FINE, SUPERFINE, NORMAL etc. This is to fool you into thinking all cams will use the same amount of compression if they use the same words. Not true! One cam manufacturers' FINE is not necessarily anothers. So this makes comparing pics across different cams interesting, because you also need to know what FINE means.

Fortunately, you can get some clues by comparing file sizes and sometimes how many pics a manufacturer says will fit on a card. Unless you can actually shoot an identical scene, even this is flawed, scenes with complex detail will make bigger files. So, if you are marketing a cam and selling on the estimated number of shots per card, what options would you go for? You guessed it, get as much compression as you can get away with compared to competing models and do your tests on average to low detail scenes!

The answer to your post is therefore not one based on science with repeatable results (estimates only). Don't be misled by the large number of pics - more compression means more pics but potentially lower quality due to more artefacts.

You would be wise to consider 3Mpix FINE. You have a biggish card and you can't get the quality back afterwards, when you get back home!
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 20, 2003, 2:46 PM   #49
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 14
Default

I purchased a s602z a few weeks back. From searching on the web and this site I decided to purchase a lexar 24x CF card. the first thing i did was format the card after i loaded it into the cam. I recieved no errors what so ever. I have been shooting pictures in tiff mode as well as in 3mpixel mode with the lexar 256 CF for about 3 weeks and everything has been fine. I can record QVGA video until the entire CF is full. I can't record VGA till the card is full because the card is too slow. I can record about 60 secs worth of VGA video. Someone on this forum used a transcend 30x CF card and that has worked for them when shooting in VGA mode. But from my own personal experience, I have no problems using the 256 lexar 24x CF card and it has been 3 weeks.
camerachallenge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 20, 2003, 7:04 PM   #50
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

It's only VGA movie you're losing. Bet you might just get that if you reformatted the card with a larger FAT cluster size.
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:28 AM.