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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 16, 2003, 7:04 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 40
Default CF storage delays: is this normal?

I have recently bought a Nikon Coolpix 2100.
It came with a dinky 8mb CF card. Useful for 640x480 pics I only need to show up in a webpage (it holds about 80 of them, despite the camera saying 72), but not for much else.
When I bought the camera, I shelled out for an additional 256MB CF. I first wanted to get a 128, but then I thought what the hell, and got the 256 one instead.
The card has "High speed" printed over it in large red letters, yet its speed seems to be a lot worse than that of the tiny 8mb one.
With the 8mb in, the camera powers up and goes into picture mode almost instantly. Snapping a picture and having it recorded takes about a second, with no need to use the buffer at all.
On the other hand, on the 256 card the camera takes about 4 to 5 seconds to initialize, and a bit less to store an image in the card. Deleting them is also slower, though reviewing them thankfully isn't.
Is this behavior normal? Does the camera access the card so slowly because of its larger size, or because it isn't "high speed" at all?
Violet sky is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 16, 2003, 7:16 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

Yours is a question that is difficult to give a simple answer to. First the speed on a card means nothing if the camera processor cannot use it. My car has tires rated to 150Mph, but my engine won't push it that fast! Cards have different format structures depending on their size.

The camera identifies each card size and says OK this is a big card, it's probably going to store a lot of filenames so I need to read more of the card memory at the start (even if you only have a couple of pics stored on it). I'll bet if you put in a 16Mb card you wouldn't see much difference to the 8Mb. I think there is a format change jumping from 128 to 256. So 2X128 might have been faster than 1&256.

A lot has to do with the cards pre-formatted cluster sizes. You can reformat cards to smaller cluster sizes, search for info here, but this is not Newbie stuff. With a bigger card you may notice less speed differences if your camera is set for saving the highest quality largest files than say low quality to get many more shots. VOX
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2003, 9:21 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Could you tell us exactly which 256MB card you got? Brand and model?

I'll also point out that "high speed" is a marketing term. It really means nothing. I could put "high speed" on my car, but a F-1 car will still blow the doors off it.

Personally, I wouldn't have expected that much slowdown during startup. I've never used the CP2100, so I can't say from experience. Just seems a little odd.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 18, 2003, 10:52 AM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 40
Default

Ah, dammit... I knew I should have bought 2 128 mb cards, I would have spent the same money...
I'll look into this cluster thing. I'm not exactly a computer newbie... Thank you

Quote:
Originally Posted by eric s
Could you tell us exactly which 256MB card you got? Brand and model?
Dikom CompactFlash 256. It's all I can read on it and/or the sheet of paper in the box.
It's got a small blue square with a white "PQI" printed in it.

Quote:
I'll also point out that "high speed" is a marketing term. It really means nothing. I could put "high speed" on my car, but a F-1 car will still blow the doors off it
I know... It was meant to be ironic

Quote:
Personally, I wouldn't have expected that much slowdown during startup. I've never used the CP2100, so I can't say from experience. Just seems a little odd
This isn't a big problem... It's not like it takes forever to start up, I can take burst pictures with the high speed mode, and the camera seems to have a pretty large buffer.
It's just that that big a difference between the two cards got me puzzled.
Thank you all
Violet sky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 18, 2003, 9:35 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Unfortunately, I haven't seen a Dikom CF card, so I can't comment on the brand. I was hoping it was one I might recognise.

I would more lean towards the card just being a slow card than it being cluster size. It could be, but since this card seem to have no speed rating on it (usually listed as an "x" factor, like 8x or 12x....)

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 18, 2003, 9:57 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

the 2100 is not known for its blazing speed in the data transfer catagory. you have to look at it from a point of view of economy. the price point of the camera vs performance. the term high speed is relative to the cameras capability to do the transfer at a relative high speed to the card. in short the card may be able to take a higher speed data transfer then the camera is capable of giving.

now being that Dikom is an unknown name in these parts and possibly elsewhere too there is a good possibility there is a major issue with that card. suggestion- return it and buy only known manufacturers such as delkin, lexar, sandisk. these are primary manufacturers that back their products with performance relative to price (some have multiple levels of performance and pricing tiers)and warranties to back up their quality. with regret there are lots of lesser products out there that will leave you less the satisfied.
sjms 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 7:17 PM.