Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 21, 2004, 1:46 AM   #21
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 49
Default

yeah, the problem was that i could get a bit of a deal on buying the sandisk from this one particular store, thats why it was $155 after tax...i wouldnt get the same deal from the site i sent you, so id pay full price plus tax, which meant the 512meg 32x lexar would come to about $230...

well JimC, i think you've persuaded me to go down to a 256meg 32x lexar...you dont have a problem with that one, do you? :lol:

its all i can afford, and it'll give me a fair amount of space for pics and video until maybe these cards fall a bit in price... so hows that plan?
Redman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 21, 2004, 2:25 AM   #22
TC3
Senior Member
 
TC3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,169
Default

Save your self some money and get a 256mb simpletech from e bay for about $65!! That way you can buy 2....you know it makes sense!
TC3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 21, 2004, 8:16 AM   #23
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

the "controller" in a sd card is not the same design or app as a the one used on a cf card in fact it is not a true controller. it is referred to as the periferal businterface groupand is a low level type. they are used in conjunction with the external or periferal controller and only one at a time.

ref sandisk software toolguide

http://www.sandisk.com/oem_sd_memorycard.html

ref pg 8 and 18

the idea was to remove the "controller" per say to allow a cleaner fastersimpler interface to the memory



sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 21, 2004, 8:43 AM   #24
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

sjms wrote:
Quote:
the "controller" in a sd card is not the same design or app as a the one used on a cf card in fact it is not a true controller. it is referred to as the periferal businterface groupand is a low level type. they are used in conjunction with the external or periferal controller and only one at a time.

ref sandisk software toolguide

http://www.sandisk.com/oem_sd_memorycard.html

ref pg 8 and 18

the idea was to remove the "controller" per say to allow a cleaner fastersimpler interface to the memory




Well, even Sandisk refers to this as controller in their marketing (with their Ultra II description talking about "optimized controller technology". Some other companies marketing Secure Digital also refer to it as having a built in controller. Take this product description fora Kingston card as an example:

http://www.picstop.co.uk/prodinfo.php?product=533

Also, I remember one site discussing 3 speeds of controllers used in SD. So, even if it's not a true controller, then it's design appears to impact performance.

I do see where the host device for the SD has it's own controller, so you are correct.

Thanks for the info and links!

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 21, 2004, 9:04 AM   #25
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

yes especially when using the security mode.

it also seems MMC is not quite dead yet. there is a company producing some high capacity high speed cards.


doesn't that word "controller" just have a power meaning. much easier and cooler then "peripheral bus interface group". i feel that the PBIG acronym would have blown people away:lol:
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 21, 2004, 1:22 PM   #26
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

You're both right! There's a:

1. Memory Controller which makes standard NAND cells "look" like SD: http://www.arasan.com/sd_mem_controller_core.pdf

2. Host Controller, although this can be implemented in firmware like the above Sandisk (or other OEMs) API: http://www.arasan.com/sd_sdio_HC_handout.pdf



... BTW there's more than 1 vendor: http://www.siliconmotion.com/en/fmpsg.htm

NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 21, 2004, 11:03 PM   #27
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 49
Default

i bought a 32x speed 256meg sd card from lexar... didnt break the bank and i can still hold as GOOD amount of pics..

thanks guys...
Redman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 26, 2004, 9:40 AM   #28
Senior Member
 
Ronnie948's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 721
Default

Ain't Nothing wrong with the SANDISK CF Cards. If You get one now get the Ultra II because they do write about three times faster then the old Sandisk Cards. I have been using Sandisk CF Cards for years with absolutly NO Problems at all. I just did 700 photographs at My Church Vacation Bible School last week without a single problem using My 512 & 256 SANDISK ULTRA II CF CARDS. I bought them on E-Bay for much less then the big box stores around here charge for them. I'm sure that Lexar and others make a fine CF Card but I have not had a need to change brands because the SANDISK works very well for My needs.
Ronnie948 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 26, 2004, 9:43 AM   #29
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Ronnie:

Sandisk CF cards are fine. Secure Digital is "another ballgame".


JimC 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 6:54 PM.