|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#11 | ||
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
|
![]()
dnas wrote:
Quote:
It's the speed of the camera's interface to the cards that is the primary limiting factor. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 45
|
![]()
CF has been an enduring success. In the wake of smaller cards (SD, XD, MMC, MS etc...) CF managed to hold them all off for years as other formats came and went. Fast speeds,fairly wide compatability (with few problems)and relatively rugged construction (I never liked exposed contacts) probably helped. With the huge demand for the small digital cameras, I suppose it's inevitable that a small card will be favoured by manufacturers. SD seems to hold most promise at the moment, even the Nikon D50 is the first Nikon DSLR to break with the CF tradition.
Cards with a smaller physical size are probably undesirable, there has to be a point where smaller is too small for even the tiniest fingers. If the current card wars ever has a winner, I'd hazard a guess that it will be the gold medal for SD and second place silver medal for CF. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|