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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 23, 2007, 1:11 PM   #11
Member
 
cristovao12's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 61
Default

I know you asked me to give you the results of my current standard SanDisk CF 4GB card and the Extreme III that I intend on buying soon, but I just received an Olympus 2GB xD card and did a little comparison between the CF card and it.

Surprisingly, the results were the same. Using either card, I was able to capture 5 frames in 2 seconds before the continuous shot mode stopped. I would've thought the CF card would have done a little better than the xD but apparently they are the same. Hopefully the Extreme III will blow both out of the water. As soon as I get one I'll post the results.
cristovao12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 2007, 3:46 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

I would not have expected anything different. The architecture of the xD when compared to the CF doesn't, in and of itself, have any improved throughput, except for the newer Type H cards, and even then the difference is not substancial.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 2007, 4:10 PM   #13
Member
 
cristovao12's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 61
Default

I wasn't expecting the xD card to be faster...I was actually thinking it would be slower than even the standard CF card. The surprise was that it performed the same.
cristovao12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 3, 2007, 10:03 PM   #14
Member
 
cristovao12's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 61
Default

Well, I FINALLY picked up a supposedly faster CF card. I wanted to get the SanDisk Extreme III card but the camera store didn't have any in stock (they sell out of the 2GB cards pretty quickly at just under $70 Canadian). So, instead, I picked up the Lexar Pro UDMA 2GB 300x for just under $80 instead.

So, here's the test I ran. When using sequential shooting, as I'd mentioned before, both the xD card and the standard SanDisk 4GB CF card took five shots before stopping.

With the new Lexar, I managed to take 6 shots sequentially before it stopped. I did notice that if I let go of the trigger and refocus and shoot again, it would take anywhere between 2-4 more shots but it still lagged behind as the red light indicated that it was still writing to the card.

At this point, I suspect the lag is with the cameras (which, btw, is the Olympus E500 dSLR) ability to transfer the image to the card. According to the camera store salesman, this card rates inbetween the Extreme III and IV cards. Also, I have NOT flashed my camera yet, so I'm hoping that will help. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
cristovao12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2007, 9:45 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

If using a much faster flash memory card only gives you a marginal improvement in performance, then the bottleneck is very likely the camera itself.

Interestingly, the FAQs has some info on the subject. This is what I found.

How long does it take to write the image to the media?

This figure depends on speed of media card used. As a general guideline, a SanDisk Extreme III CF card is fast enough to allow you to continuously shoot without any delay (using the default HQ quality mode).

The Olympus Support website does show two firmware upgrades for the E-500, and both seem to include worthwhile features, but neither makes any mention of improved performance when writing to flash memory cards.

While I was reading the FAQs, I came upon something that could affect flash memory write speed, so I think you should look at

http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_se...asp?id=1192#43

just to be sure.


TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2007, 10:43 AM   #16
Member
 
cristovao12's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 61
Default

So, I did end up flashing the camera last night and it made no difference but I just noticed something that may have an impact on this.

I've been using the highest jpg quality, SHQ. I was under the impression that I should be able to max this out at that quality but you just mentioned HQ, so when I get home tonight, I'm going to try reducing the quality to HQ and test again to see if there's a difference.

Thanks for your input!
cristovao12 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 6:22 PM.