Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > Memory Cards, Microdrives, Card Readers

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 13, 2002, 8:30 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6
Default Myth or Fact

I have been told by an 'expert' in a camera store that using a card reader to download degrades your images. Or put another way images are way better downloaded straight from the camera.
Help me out here...is this for real?
joann is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jul 13, 2002, 8:42 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default MYTH

MYTH MYTH MYTH.

ther is no difference from either. you are moving data from point A to B. and thats all it is 0's and 1's. i know of no mainstream camera that does any form of processing in image xfer to your PC/Mac.

i think you should ask the expert in detail how this degradation occurs. that should be an interesting story.

your camera is just acting like a reader in transfer mode. just slower and using up your batteries. or is he trying to sell you the optional AC adapter?

[Edited on 7-14-2002 by sjms]

[Edited on 7-14-2002 by sjms]
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2002, 2:02 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
BillDrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Hay River Township, WI
Posts: 2,512
Default

I prefer using USB direct from the camera since that means less handling of the memory and thus less chance of damage. My camera (Casio 3000) has a fairly fast USB connection so there a reader offers no advantage. The AC adapter is good idea to have if you are doing that, and is also usefull for tethered shooting.

As sjms said, there is no difference in quality of the image.
BillDrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2002, 2:58 AM   #4
Administrator
 
steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,535
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by joann
I have been told by an 'expert' in a camera store that using a card reader to download degrades your images. Or put another way images are way better downloaded straight from the camera.
Help me out here...is this for real?
The old Agfa ePhoto 370, 1280 and 1680 cameras used the PhotoGenie program to interpolate the images up to a higher pixel count during the camera to computer transfer.

Modern cameras store their images in standard JPEG or TIF format except for those that offer a RAW format. The RAW images must be post-processed by software to change them into JPEG or TIF or import them into Photoshop for editing first.

The only possible problem with using a card reader is if you use the computer's FORMAT command. Flash cards must be formatted using the old FAT-16 file structure or else the camera won't recognize it. Windows XP, ME and 2000 have the ability to format the cards with a different file structure. It is always best to format the cards ONLY in the camera.

-Steve
steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2002, 3:08 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

damage to a cf card is pretty difficult. no moving parts. they're pretty darn hardy little fellas. they will take a serious beating. though i wouldnt try submersion(i have heard stories of them making thru the spin cycle) or breaking them in half. children under age 5 might give it a good go. but other than that failures were pretty much at time of power up in a camera. ERR. a quick voltage input to a marginal component and poof. most manufacturers put liberal warrentees on these devices generally 5yrs to lifetime. they're pretty much electrically isolated from the outside.

[Edited on 7-14-2002 by sjms]
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2002, 3:12 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

boy steve if anyone could have found those cameras it would have to be you. you really dug those up. congrats!
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2002, 6:54 AM   #7
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

I still have my 1680, in fact I believe the 1280 came out before the Coolpix 900 so I guess one can always argue who has copy who swivel body design...

Smartmedia/CF readers were a rare commodity back then (Flashpath floppy adapter were the only alternative). Beside theses cameras can only load from the RS-232 port, but their GUI is exemplary in German efficiency. May be it patented or something, but dialing the thumbwheel up or down and pushing it in to select on the 1280/1680 is the sleekest interface so far and is about the only control one ever need! The CP990 which I finally bought to replace it has 5 more buttons and still has a really cryptic GUI.



However I side with sjms: The stationary pins are on the camera side, and the weareable flexible female contact are on the flash side. Which would you rather replaced? the flash or the tiny USB contact on the expensive camera side when they wear out...


[Edited on 7-14-2002 by NHL]
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2002, 12:58 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6
Default Horse Hockey...wasn't it!

Hey thanks everyone...I thought it was horse hockey! I have always used a card reader...now a firewire reader which rocks! Just really had to find out ...:P
joann 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 9:32 AM.