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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 28, 2002, 5:38 PM   #11
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

dirtyharry71

Unfortunately the only time where a faster CF cards matter is in RAW/TIFF. In jpeg it doesn't make sense to measure a single shot since the camera can buffer up several shots for write to a slower flash card (ie don't invest in faster cards if all you shoot are jpegs). The cards/microdrive speeds are camera dependent as well, and you can be trigger happy in jpegs, but not in RAW/TIFF where you have to wait for the entire single frame to be emptied!

What I've found is the larger the files, the faster the microdrive is! Don't get me wrong I've plenty of flash cards, but I use the microdrives for their convenience & cost. i.e. I never worry about running out of film the entire day (and all I need is an extra set of battery). BTW I also work with a lot of MPEG video files, and believe me the microdrive are plenty fast for carrying huge files around, not so with flash when used on a true CF+ standard in a laptop!

BTW excellent choice with that Agfa 1680, it was my favorite @ the time!
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2002, 11:41 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

dirtyharry71


reference this site and see how CF amd MD react in different DSLRs note especially the speed in the kodak dcs 760.

http://www.robgalbraith.com/media/co...ash/index.html

you will see that all cameras do not read/write equal.
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2002, 8:38 AM   #13
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

sjms

The DCS's looks better and better everyday... It looks like they truly put in an IDE controller in theses cameras rather than all this 'firmware' only cost concious gears to exploit the speed of the microdrive (10 RAW files, Whoa!). Considering that it takes the microdrive 1-2s to spin up that's fast:

http://www.robgalbraith.com/media/co...ak_dcs760.html

They also must know what they are doing for sticking with firewire instead of the 'faster' USB 2.0 where the bandwidth of the transfers are not guaranteed (as in 1394)...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 30, 2002, 9:43 PM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 15
Default

Ooops! I am on 8000 ft! Does it matter? Tom
Tomislav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 30, 2002, 11:19 PM   #15
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

You're lucky then, the limit is 10,000ft!

http://www.steves-digicams.com/microdrive.html

Quote:
The high capacity of the 1 GB Microdrive enabled shuttle crew to be more productive by giving them extra time to spend capturing images instead of swapping in and out storage cards, as would be the case with lower capacity removable memory formats. In addition, according to Kodak and independent third-party testing, the Microdrive's high performance enables Kodak digital cameras to write images to the Microdrive more quickly than to any other storage technology.
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 31, 2002, 9:13 AM   #16
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

BTW There are excellent high resolution pictures that one can download there... I guess this is afterall where some of our tax money go!

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/

On another note, there's probably a reason for using the microdrive over flash in space where Rad-Hard is a must and flashes as well as other solid state memories have their weak link! (especially mass maket low-grade non Milspecs NAND flashes)
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 25, 2002, 4:44 PM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3
Default

are microdrives more fragile....

Posted: Mon Nov 25, 2002 3:24 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have personal (bad) experience with the 340 MB drive... it died after 2 years and 8 months of fairly infrequent use . Never physically abused it (dropping or otherwise) and never removed it from the camera. While it worked, it was nice to be able to take virtually unlimited shots.. although it was pretty slow processing them and got slower the more shots it had recorded. I would have to dump the pictures to my PC and purge the drive to get any reasonable response times from it. Also, couldn't use continuous shooting mode with it.

When I contacted IBM tech support about repair or whatever... they said there is no repair service available for it.

Bottom line... unless you have an ABSOLUTE need for the amount of storage they offer, I'd stick with memory cards... multiple if necessary... no moving parts. Even if a flash card does go bad, you're not looking at losing nearly as large an investment and all your eggs won't be in one basket!
karlbass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 25, 2002, 4:54 PM   #18
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

karlbass

What went bad?

Did you try a disk utility or fdisk it and start over... There's no doubt that a mechanical device is always more fragile than a solid state. It's their cost/Mb, convenience and speed that is hard to beat!
NHL 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 4:43 AM.