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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 6, 2005, 10:18 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 6
Default

Hi, i recently bought dimage a200 and it uses CF cards only (and microdrives). I have one 128mb from my previous cam but i need a larger one of course

I dont want to buy CF card cause it's dying anyway and i have built-in SD reader in my laptop. So, is it a good idea to buy a CF type II shell so that i can insert SD card there?

I mean, will it work with my a200, will the speed be reduced and what is the best one to buy?
Soulcatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 6, 2005, 10:39 PM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Soulcatcher wrote:
Quote:
I dont want to buy CF card cause it's dying anyway and i have built-in SD reader in my laptop. So, is it a good idea to buy a CF type II shell so that i can insert SD card there?
I don't know about that one (dying anyway). Most DSLR models use CF. SD has lower power draw, a smaller footprint. But, you've got more room in CF.

If you had a big investment in SD, it would be one thing. But, a 128mb SD Card is very inexpensive now.

You'd pay more for the adapter than the SD card is worth. Then, you'd pay more to get SD cards that work in the adapter then you could buy equivalentCompactFlash cards for.

Also, you typically take a performance hit through an adapter, too.

Konica-Minolta makes one that would work (it's a CompactFlash Type I adapter, so it would work in CF type I or II devices.

Konica-Minolta SD-CF1

But,forless than that,you could buy a Lexar 80x 512mb CompactFlash Card, and have4 times the storage you'd have with your 128mb SD card, as well as pretty good performance (since this particular card seems to be a favorite among Ax series camera owners). Or, spend a little more and get an even larger card.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2005, 11:28 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 6
Default

JimC wrote:
Quote:
I don't know about that one (dying anyway).┬* Most DSLR models use CF.┬* SD has lower power draw, a smaller footprint.┬* But, you've got more room in CF.
I dont know about DSLRs, but in prosumer and lower it is virtually nonexistant now Besides, visit any online shop - there are tons of SD's and very few CF's now. They cost practically the same now, and in near future SD will be cheaper imo.

Quote:
If you had a big investment in SD, it would be one thing.┬* But, a 128mb SD Card is very inexpensive now.

You'd pay more for the adapter than the SD card is worth.┬* Then, you'd pay more to get SD cards that work in the adapter then you could buy equivalent┬*CompactFlash cards for.
So, some SD cards wont work in the adapter? Is it a fact?

Quote:
Also, you typically take a performance hit through an adapter, too.
Theoretically, yes, but will it be enough to impact the performance? I mean, if using the adapter decreases writing speed from 10mb to 8mb, but camera itself can write only at 1mb, then i dont care

Quote:
Konica-Minolta makes one that would work
Yeah, it's mighty expensive, of course i'm not stupid enuff to buy a native Konica shell which is 10x more expensive than anything else

Quote:
But,┬*for┬*less than that,┬*you could buy a Lexar 80x 512mb CompactFlash Card[/url], and have┬*4 times the storage you'd have with your 128mb SD card, as well as pretty good performance (since this particular card seems to be a favorite among Ax series camera owners).┬*┬* Or, spend a little more and get an even larger card.
Mm, why do you think i want to buy 128mb SD? ))) I'm going to buy at least 2gb one.

p.s. Besides, it's just a matter of convenience - my laptop has built-in SD slot, so i wont have to carry stand-alone reader with me all the time...
Soulcatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2005, 11:59 PM   #4
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Soulcatcher wrote:
Quote:
So, some SD cards wont work in the adapter? Is it a fact?
They should work. I was just mentioning that because you can usually buy the identical card (manufacturer, specs)for less in CF than you can in SD (hence, the "pay more" part). Prices are getting closer, but CF is still less expensive in most popular brands

As far as paying 10x as much for KM's adapter, they're probably about the only "game in town" for one that's going to work properly (and I don't mean just for KM cameras).

Just recently someone was here that had tried 2 other ones and couldn't get them to work in their devices (they were physically too large to close the CF Compartment Door in their camera).

This is a device that other (non Konica-Minolta) camera owners are looking for too. Everyone was out of them recently, but it looks like B&H got some in (and I also see a few other dealers with them now, but I don't trust the dealers I see coming up claiming to have them). It's been pretty hard to come by (this adapter) until this recent shipment.

As far as the peformance hit, it's usually quite significant. For example, an Extreme III CompactFalsh card in a 7D is almost twice as fast an Extreme III SD Card in the same camera via this adapter. I haven't seen any performance test with it in the A200 yet.

It's not that your camera writes at 1x or 100x, it's just that there can be a big difference in speed between different cards with the Ax series KM models (and sometimes a card that's rated faster may be much slower than one that's rated slower, too.

You can't go by the 1x, 2x, etc. ratings for card speed in a model like yours. So, I don't know how big of a hit you'd take by trying to use this adapter. The Lexar 40x CompactFlash cards are favored by many A200 owners (but the 80x Lexar cards are almost as fast in it).

The PNY 40X seems to be about the best based in the Ax series modelson performance tests I've seen, and the Kingston Elite Pro cards are the worst I've seen tested in the Ax series cameras (much slower than most other cards -- even those that are not rated very fast, including most of the standard speed Kingston Cards). You've got card compatibilty issue involved that are not obvious looking at card specs. Although, the A200 does seem to be a bit less "finnicky" on cards compared to the A2.

Here is a recent thread discussing cards for your camera:

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=52

It's your money. If you want to try a solution that puts another interface between the camera and the memory card, go for it.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2005, 12:17 AM   #5
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

P.S. Here is another recent thread where someone was looking for an adapter:

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=52

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2005, 12:23 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

JimC's asserted that:
Quote:
I was just mentioning that because you can usually buy the identical card (manufacturer, specs)for less in CF than you can in SD (hence, the "pay more" part). Prices are getting closer, but CF is still less expensive in most popular brands
I know absolutely nothing about the performance numbers, nor the adapters and how they work (and their effects or non-effects.)

But I can look up prices.
And the bottom line is that they are basically the same price:
SanDisk 1GB 60x Ultra II SD is $87.95
SanDisk 1GB 60x Ultra II CF is $89.95

SanDisk 2GB 60x Ultra II SD is $176.95
SanDisk 2GB 60x Ultra II CF is $179.95
(all prices from adorama.com. Their prices almost always match B&H, but their interface for listing products is much better.)
Lexar doesn't make a 2G SD card, and they don't make a SD as fast as their fastest CF. Their 60x SD is 3 dollars more than their 80x CF card.
So at least in one of the name brands, SD is cheaper.... but not another one. Personally, I don't buy CF or SD from anyone but Lexar and SanDisk.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2005, 7:18 AM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 85
Default

If the problem is compatability with your laptop why not get a pcmcia card that will fit into your laptop that will read CF cards. I bought one at CompUSA for $10. I leave mine in all the time and it works the same as the SD slot and may be a bit faster.
broisman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2005, 7:26 AM   #8
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

eric s

My bad then...

I haven't checked the prices lately, and it does look like SD is about the same price as CF now.



JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2005, 8:16 AM   #9
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I've got cameras using both CF and SD, and my SD cards are newer. But, I would not consider using an adapter in a newer camera model from KM (as they tend to be a bit "finnicky" on what cards work best).

It's up to you, and I can't find anyone that has done a testin the A200 using one.

When they first came out, the idea was that you'd get better performance using SD with an adapter, versus CF without one. At that time, larger SD cards were faster than CF.

Looking for user reports, they are mixed in some of the older KM cameras in this series as to user opinion (with some saying noticeably slower, and others saying faster). But, they were comparing older, dissimilar cards, and didn't run any speed tests.

The only recent test I've found using one in a KM model were from a KM 7D owner, where you've got a pretty good database compiled on how various memory cards test in it.

In the case ofa 1GBExtreme III SD card used in the Minolta SD-CF1 adapter, the camera performs at a write speed of 3MB/Second (based on timing write times for raw).

The 1GB Extreme III CompactFlash time writes at 5.53MB/Second in this same Konica-Minolta camera.

TheExtreme III CF was almost twice as fast, taking just 1.57 seconds to write a raw file to media, versus 2.90 seconds for the Extreme III via the SD-CF1 adapter.

These are not just dumb "card shells". You're puttingelectronicsin between the camera and the memory card when you use one, so thespeed of the adapter is going to impact performance to SD.

Given the difference you see in speed between different cards in the A series KM models, I wouldn't risk it because of the convenience of using the SD slot in your laptop. I'd buy the type of memory the camera was designed for.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2005, 12:54 PM   #10
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 6
Default

JimC wrote:
Quote:
It's up to you, and I can't find anyone that has done a test┬*in the A200 using one.

The only recent test I've found using one in a KM model were from a KM 7D owner, where you've got a pretty good database compiled on how various memory cards test in it.

In the case of┬*a 1GB┬*Extreme III SD card used in the Minolta SD-CF1 adapter, the camera performs at a write speed of 3MB/Second (based on timing write times for raw).┬*┬*┬*

The 1GB Extreme III CompactFlash time writes at 5.53MB/Second in this same Konica-Minolta camera.

The┬*Extreme III CF was almost twice as fast, taking just 1.57 seconds to write a raw file to media, versus 2.90 seconds for the Extreme III via the SD-CF1 adapter.┬*
7D is in another category, it is better by definition. I've seen some people tested their a200's by shooting in burst mode (5 RAW) - the average time btwn pressing the release button and "busy" led stopping to blink was 37-47 secs - so it means a200 has writing speed of about 1mb/sec. Cards tested were Transcend 1gb 80x (~46secs), 66x Sandisk (~36secs), 45x Kingston (~45secs).

Sooo... a200 is so much slower than 7d that it's not even funny That's why i'm not sure if i can feel the drop in performance using the shell.
Soulcatcher 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 10:31 AM.