Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Panasonic / Leica

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 4, 2004, 5:11 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
playlong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 237
Default



I have redone all my tests and added a Panasonic 256 10mbs card.

The test was between the Panasonic 16mb, the Sandisk 256 regular and the Panasonic 256MB 10mbs card using a controlled 5 burst mode shots followed by the recording of the sixth picture ASAP. In all cases, the timings were performed three times per card using a digital clock as the subject and timekeeper. The results were determined from reading the second hand in the pictures. The disappearance of the write to card indicator was not accurate because it did not allow for the immediate use of the camera. I am not going to detail the test except to say that it was conducted indoors on a tripod with fixed lighting and subject. The initial 5-burstmode capture to memory time of between 1.5 and 2 seconds was constant and not included in the test because I was measuring write time.

Product: 5-Burst file size: Time to record: MPS:



Panasonic 16mb 1.60x5=8.00mb 7.5 1.06

Regular Sandisk 1.61x5=8.05mb 6.5 1.24

Panasonic 256 10MB 1.64x5=8.20mb 4.0 2.05



Average product cost

Regular Sandisk $56.00

Panasonic 256 10MB $88.00



Conclusion: Panasonic was correct, the FZ10 cannot write faster then 2mbs. If other cards performed at there specification it would not be necessary to pay outlandish prices for unused speeds. At the prices stated above the Panasonic is 65% faster and costs 57% more. However, some people have paid much more for the 10MB Panasonic and other brands and much less for the regular Sandisk. CAVEAT EMPTOR let the buyer beware.



Do not waste your time questioning or commenting on my test or results. This was unfinished business and there will be no response.


playlong is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 4, 2004, 8:34 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Klaas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 164
Default

Why do you post this test if you don't want to discuss it?

You should measure the write time (watch the write icon) after a 5 shot HQ burst. With a 512MB Sandisk Ultra III measure2 seconds write time so write speed from FZ10 to the card is approx 3,5MB/sec.
Klaas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 4, 2004, 9:07 PM   #3
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

playlong:

That's funny. Your own tests show that the Panasonic 10mb/second card is significantly faster, yet you warn buyers about wasting money on a faster card. :-)

Of course you're not going to get 10mb/second out of a card rated at 10mb/second -- just like you're not going to get 2mb/second out of a card rated at 2mb/second. But, if one is significantly faster than another in the camera you are using it in, who cares about the ratings?


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 6, 2004, 3:23 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8
Default

I just want to know how you managed to read the second hand on a DIGITAL clock.

While this may just be a careless typo, it certainly doesn't instill cofidence in your test. This is especially so given that your results contradict the results of others and that you claim that you acheived greater than 2mb/s transfer rates with a camera that you say can't achieve them. Furthermore your advice doesn't seem to follow from your testing. The 10mb/s card is 65% faster than a 2mb/s card according to you. It doesn't follow of course that one shouldn't pay more than 65% more for a faster card. That speed difference might be insignificant or critical depend on the user's goals.

I do appreciate the time and effort you put into testing this, but your presentation of results raises enough concerns that it's hard to know what your data might mean.
drnihili is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 6, 2004, 6:46 PM   #5
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Look, my apologies for laughing in my previous post. At least you had the guts to post the results, even though you may not have been for buying the faster cards. I haven't checked your post history. However, judging by your attitude, that's probably the case.

So, thanks for letting users know about the differences you found.

Look, thirty something bucks is nothing, compared to the extra speed many users may want/need over the life of a card.

In fact, it's common with many devices to pay a LOT more, for a little extra.

IMO,the Panasonic cards are a bargain, compared to the slower standard Sandisk cards.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 6, 2004, 8:41 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 175
Default







WRITE
READ

FZ20
FZ10
FZ20
FZ10

8MB
957
947
3,608
3,558

16MB
1,044
999
3,369
3,379

32MB
1,507
1,223
5,006
3,598

64MB
1,262
1,231
5,002
3,560

128MB
1,339
973
3,555
3,478

256MB
5,887
2,666
10,640
5,668

512MB
5,72
The above chart is an kb/s comparison of read/write speeds of the DMC-FZ10 and DMC-FZ20. I got this information from Panasonic tech support. I also attached the original

FZFUN
Attached Files
File Type: zip SD card performance.zip (5.1 KB, 215 views)
FZFUN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 7, 2004, 9:01 AM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 8
Default

FZ, I don't see any info in your last posting. Do I need to do something special to see it?
microdolx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 7, 2004, 12:28 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 175
Default

I posted a chart, which seemed to show up when I pasted it, but when I saved the post, it disappeared. I went back in to edit it out, and include the file that the tech sent me instead, and tried to delete the chart, but apparently it doesn't really exist, so can't be deleted. The .zip is actually an Excel chart with some performance specsin it.

FZFUN


style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"P.S. I justed edited this post to let you know that I realized that if youhighlight the blank spaceabove my text in that post, the chart SORT OF shows up, but its all pushed to the right side of the screen instead of the original format.

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"
FZFUN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 8, 2004, 4:09 AM   #9
Member
 
StormyKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 57
Default

512MB seems to be the go for both. Odd that 32MB is faster than 128MB, I guess its something to do with the internal structure of these cards.
StormyKnight 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 12:44 AM.