Steve'sDigicams

jaydee · Apr 8, 2003, 1:30 AM

I'm dwelling on the idea of getting a USB 2.0 card reader just because of the faster up & download. But I am interested in some feedback. Just how many of you have such a animal. Goods & bads of having or not using a card reader. Do you think it's a must have accessory or am I wasting my money.

Mike_PEAT · Apr 8, 2003, 8:11 AM

If you have USB 2.0 on the computer, and if there is a 2.0 card reader out there (will be more expensive).

The thing is though, the speed will be set by the card itself...it can only go as fast as the card will operate at.

There are pluses and minuses for going with a card reader, or reading directly from the camera.

I personally just use the USB cable hooked up to the camera because I don't want to wear out the SM slot on the camera. The downside is if I get enough of a surge it could blow the camera.

sjms · Apr 8, 2003, 9:12 AM

in almost all situations a card reader will beat a camera for transfer of data. MP is correct in that the speed will be determined by the card in this situation but most modern CF cards today exceed the cameras ability to move data by a substantial margin.

only cameras with firewire that shoot teathered to a laptop will give a reader a run for the money.

most cameras are still based on USB 1.1 12Mbit/s max xfr. the USB2 capability is 480Mbit/s.

a PCI USB2 adapter card is about ~$20US or less.
the cost of a usb2 reader is ~$29US

most new mobo's have USB2 standard today. USB1.1 is quickly being phased out since 2 is backwards compatible.

just did a little quick experiment
1gb lexar 32x wa card full of minolta raw images approx 102 at 9.7MB per image
1 zio usb2 reader
plugged it into a 1.1 port and the download took in excess of 25 minutes into a scsi 160HD
plugged it into my 2.0 port and it downloaded to the same drive in a little less than 4 minutes.

yes your download time will vary from card to card. but usb2 does leverage your cards max xfr rate on a pure ATA transfer bus.

voxmagna · Apr 8, 2003, 10:50 AM

Moving big expensive CF or MD back and forth, is not something I like doing too often.

But I never worried about SM that much, only a few surface wiping gold contacts, compared to the 50 or so smaller pins of CF.

My new Dazzle reader doesn't have a media eject button - so that's another reason to be more careful.

sjms · Apr 8, 2003, 11:14 AM

vox i have never have a fault or failure of any cf card to this day that i have used. as to the 50 pins and plugs the design was to prevent we all from getting out little fingers on them. hence no real issues.

expense is relative to use. i shoot RAW. RAW takes up space at 10MB per shot on my camera. 128MB cards do not hold many 10MB images. i resell my cards downline as my needs increase. they are easily resold because of the larger user base. as i go to a FF Dslr size does matter unfortunately.

Apr 8, 2003, 1:30 AM	#1
jaydee Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 59	Card Reader or Camera Reader I'm dwelling on the idea of getting a USB 2.0 card reader just because of the faster up & download. But I am interested in some feedback. Just how many of you have such a animal. Goods & bads of having or not using a card reader. Do you think it's a must have accessory or am I wasting my money.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Steve'sDigicams

Recent Camera Reviews

Most Active Forums

Most Popular Deals

Latest Feature Articles

Apr 8, 2003, 8:11 AM	#2
Mike_PEAT Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 1,910	If you have USB 2.0 on the computer, and if there is a 2.0 card reader out there (will be more expensive). The thing is though, the speed will be set by the card itself...it can only go as fast as the card will operate at. There are pluses and minuses for going with a card reader, or reading directly from the camera. I personally just use the USB cable hooked up to the camera because I don't want to wear out the SM slot on the camera. The downside is if I get enough of a surge it could blow the camera.

Apr 8, 2003, 9:12 AM	#3
sjms Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,735	in almost all situations a card reader will beat a camera for transfer of data. MP is correct in that the speed will be determined by the card in this situation but most modern CF cards today exceed the cameras ability to move data by a substantial margin. only cameras with firewire that shoot teathered to a laptop will give a reader a run for the money. most cameras are still based on USB 1.1 12Mbit/s max xfr. the USB2 capability is 480Mbit/s. a PCI USB2 adapter card is about ~$20US or less. the cost of a usb2 reader is ~$29US most new mobo's have USB2 standard today. USB1.1 is quickly being phased out since 2 is backwards compatible. just did a little quick experiment 1gb lexar 32x wa card full of minolta raw images approx 102 at 9.7MB per image 1 zio usb2 reader plugged it into a 1.1 port and the download took in excess of 25 minutes into a scsi 160HD plugged it into my 2.0 port and it downloaded to the same drive in a little less than 4 minutes. yes your download time will vary from card to card. but usb2 does leverage your cards max xfr rate on a pure ATA transfer bus.

Apr 8, 2003, 10:50 AM	#4
voxmagna Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,162	Moving big expensive CF or MD back and forth, is not something I like doing too often. But I never worried about SM that much, only a few surface wiping gold contacts, compared to the 50 or so smaller pins of CF. My new Dazzle reader doesn't have a media eject button - so that's another reason to be more careful.

Apr 8, 2003, 11:14 AM	#5
sjms Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,735	vox i have never have a fault or failure of any cf card to this day that i have used. as to the 50 pins and plugs the design was to prevent we all from getting out little fingers on them. hence no real issues. expense is relative to use. i shoot RAW. RAW takes up space at 10MB per shot on my camera. 128MB cards do not hold many 10MB images. i resell my cards downline as my needs increase. they are easily resold because of the larger user base. as i go to a FF Dslr size does matter unfortunately.