Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Nikon

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 26, 2004, 3:54 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Catbells's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 874
Default


Still looking to finally make the decision to buy the CP8800.

I've downloaded the User Guide which specifies a limited number ofcard types and sizes that are suitable but can any one advise me on a number of points:

1. Can I use a
Sandisc Ultra greater than 256 Megs - I'd like to use 1GByte

2. Is there a noticeable improvement in speed when using a 'Fast' CF card over a basic card

3. Is
Sandisc the one to go for or should I consider a Kingston or Lexar card or whatever
Catbells is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 26, 2004, 6:06 PM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 11
Default

I'm using a Lexar 80x 1GB card (probably overkill).

The review of the camera on theImage Resource web site said that they found the camera did not write any faster with cards over 4X.

Jason.
JayEyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2004, 6:19 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,724
Default

You can use as big a card as whatever they make, as far as I know. But whether or not the write speed will increse with a faster card is ?? unknown. Beyond a point, I doubt it. From what I got from The scubbler who has one (on another post) write speeds to Tiff and Raw are slow. ( check his post ) I have sandisk, Lexar, both plain janes and ultra...and the main difference is in the quality of the card, not the make. Wierdest thing is, a plain jane san disk (just bought it) is actually as fast as a Lexar pro that I bought last year. Could it be that even the plain janes of today are faster than the best of yesterday??? Seems that way to me and my camera and my stop watch. I thought I would just throw in my opinion and experiences here, because I am very nuch leaning toward an 8800 for myself. Best regards,

KennethD
KENNETHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2004, 12:04 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
The Scubbler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 294
Default

I'm out of my league..once again ! I have a SanDisc 1GB Compact Flash card...but I don't know what 80X means on the other post. There is no info on the package or card, beyond 1GB. The salesman, who is very knowledgable, offered me the faster card, for 2 1/2 the price and said it would work.

I noticed the write time was actually slower when the camera is out in the cold. Does this sound reasonable ? 1GB is cetainly adequate, and, I think, pretty well required if you shoot RAW or TIFF . I think a 512 card would have sufficed for me, as I'll probably stay at the 8MP Extra Fine setting.

Steve
The Scubbler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2004, 12:43 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Catbells's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 874
Default

Thanks guys for the feedback. Probablytwo 512Meg cards are better thanone 1 GByte card just in case of failure - I know of some one whose 256 Meg card failed quite soon after they'd bought it.

My Fuji S602 performs pathetically slow with a standard Sandisc & writes as fast as the Smartmedia using the Sandisc Ultra card, so it's obviously worth getting a faster card up to at least 4 times.

UPDATE
Check out the review of CF Cards at DPReviewwhich does a pretty exhaustive test but it's clear that not all cards perform the same and it depends upon whether the camera can support the faster cards.
Catbells is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2004, 12:58 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Catbells's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 874
Default

Hi The Scubbler

Temperature affects the camera's electronics & battery life/performance; the Nikon 8800 is specified between 0degC & +40degC.

I would image that the internal clock speed which drives the camera's processoris slowed down at lower temperatures resulting a longer write time; that being the case it would also slow down other functions as well.

In the UK, & in particular in the south,we don't have particularly harsh winters but on such occasions when it's cold (and wet), I always keep the camera inside my fleece (waterproofs) to protect it from the elements.
Catbells is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2004, 5:12 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,724
Default

Just another (long) comment on flashcards. The price has dropped so phenomenally recently, that at last they are reasonably affordable. My first one (I have five) was a plain jane Sandisk, 256. I then got a 12X Lexar 256 then a Lexar pro 256 and then a Sandisk Ultra 256. Last one I got was a plain jane Sandisk 512. Finally got a 512, when prices came down, for less than 1/2 what I paid for the original 256. (Paid 200$ for the first 256...on sale) Right. One fine day I decide to time all these guys. Want to know the results? Be sure to tune in next week....for the shocking conclusion to this technological upset!!!!

One week later....(I always inject my warped humor at the slightest provocation)But I was shocked a bit. Plain jane Sandisk 256 :30 sec (thats right folks thirty) for a Tiff (superfine on my Dimage 7i) and 20 sec for a Raw shot. Next...in the order that I purchased these (hoping to get faster writes) Lexar 256 12X : 17 sec for a superfine (Tiff) and 12 sec for Raw. Hooray I thought! HUGE improvement. It seemed so much faster. (Even tho at this point I hadn't got out the stop watch yet.) At last!! Pony up the dough for a Lexar PRO 256 40X (right I thought.... OK watch this baby blow the doors off!!) 17 sec for super fine(Tiff) 12 sec for Raw. SAME as the 12X. This one didn't seem any faster and I thought I'd hit the wall. But I was shooting more and more going on vacations, and thought I could use ONE more 256 (prices WERE biginning to fall) Bought me a Sandisk 256 ULTRA!! (these were supposed to be HOT!!) SHOCK....30 sec for superfine (Tiff) and 21 sec for Raw.I must say here that I only timed these months after buying the Ultra. Wish I had timed each right after purchasing them. But I just assumed they would be progressively faster.Then seeing prices absolutely crash I bought the 512 plain jane Sandisk thinking well most of my shots are "fine" anyway (and these write instantly, even with the slowest card in my camera) and at this price I can't pass up the storage even if it is slower than finding a Nikon 8800 review (just joking MR STEVE...just joking sir...) So after I bought the 512 THAT'S when I finally tested them... again...all same shot all same settings all one right after the other same day. Results for the palne jane 512?? THE CHEAPEST ONE of all of them? (also the newest technology available, I suppose) 15 sec for superfine!! and 10 sec for Raw!! (7i is a 5 MP camera) WOO HOO!! So don't ask me what the write limits are for sure on anything. General common sense would say latest cards, higher rated, should be the faster ones...but man, after these results, I wouldn't bet the farm on it. From now on, ANY card I buy goes right into the camera...RIGHT AFTER I buy it, I will time it for myself, and if she don't cut the mustard, back it goes. If you managed to get this far without stopping for lunch, let me know if any of you have actually compared your cards with a stop watch...I'd be interested to know your results, and what the make and speed of the cards were. Thanks for reading, best regards,

KennthD
KENNETHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2004, 5:32 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
digcamfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,422
Default

Wow, KennethD...that is quite bit of research on compact flash cards!

Thanks
digcamfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2004, 6:56 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6
Default

KennethD,
Thanks for sharing your insight on your card experiences. All of this puts a lot of hassle into the camera/flash card selection process..........if the manufacturers of cameras and flash cards want us to buy their products, then they should assume the responsibility to test product combinations with their product and the more popular other component (camera or flash card) and post this information on the manufacturer web sites. After all, we're paying the bill and their responsibility is to be able to define and communicate their product.

How about it; Nikon, Sandisk, Lexar, etc.? We need your help in sorting through this mess. I'm sure that buyers will reward those companies that are responsive to this type of buyer dilemna.

Imagemaker in Colorado
imagemaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2004, 7:26 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,724
Default

My pleasure!! Feels good to vent a little frustration, and maybe prevent someone else from experiencing the same. On a more optimistic note, check the 'BREAKING NEWS" category on the home page. Wow! sounds like Sandisk has done a good deed with the introduction of the Extreme III, or whatever the name is. It looks very promising!! They don't say if it will work in every camera though, and I bet we're in for a crippling shot to wallet if we really want to find out. But it looks good! Best regards,

KennethD
KENNETHD 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 12:52 AM.