Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 9, 2006, 1:17 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 6
Default

I have two questions that I hope you guys can help answer:

1. What is the maximum capacity SD card that the DL can handle, 2GB or more?

2. When shooting at 2.8fps, what is the minimum speed of SD card required? 133X, or 60X or even lower?

I am about to buy a 2GB SD card and just want to be sure of the above two factors. Thanks.
imbcsab is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 9, 2006, 2:13 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 344
Default

imbcsab wrote:
Quote:
1. What is the maximum capacity SD card that the DL can handle, 2GB or more?
2GB is the maximum size for full compatibility since it is the maximum capacity for the latest SD card standard. For 4GB "SD" cards, the new SDHC (High Capacity) standards will rule.

It is reported that *some* 4GB SD cards will work on the *ist camera but one should *never* try to format it with the camera, otherwise the card will not function properly.

Quote:
2. When shooting at 2.8fps, what is the minimum speed of SD card required? 133X, or 60X or even lower?
Any of my SD cards can achieve that, even my slowest 256M "standard speed" one. Only the storing times are different, but then the difference is actually small.

Quote:
I am about to buy a 2GB SD card and just want to be sure of the above two factors. Thanks.
My advice is to get the cheapest one, which is indeed adequate for any *ist DSLR.

RiceHigh
http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh
RiceHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 9, 2006, 7:33 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Black Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Oxford, CT
Posts: 1,309
Default

Just one thing i would like to say here. I Purchase the high speed cards anyway. I do notice a Significant difference between low and high speed cards when transfering pictures to my PC Via My card reader.
Just my 2 cents
Black Knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 9, 2006, 8:45 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 344
Default

Black Knight wrote:
Quote:
Just one thing i would like to say here. I Purchase the high speed cards anyway. I do notice a Significant difference between low and high speed cards when transfering pictures to my PC Via My card reader.
Just my 2 cents
Yes, BK is right here. That's a point to consider if you want a quicker download to PC.

Nonetheless, the slowest 1GB card currently on the market is yet reasonably fast for downloading to the PC, already. I can download 1GB RAW data to the PC within 15 minutes with my Kingston/Toshiba 1G card via a cheapo $15 no-brand card reader. Thus, this is again a non-issue to me.

My bottom line is if there is a difference *in* the camera, I would invest for a faster card, which is more expensive. Otherwise, I would rather save the bucks for capacity, i.e. a larger one or more cards.

RiceHigh
http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh
RiceHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 9, 2006, 9:05 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Monza76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,093
Default

Interesting, I purchased some no-name (brand name, "Impact") 256MB cards at WalMart for less than $18Cdn each. Having read some posts about problems with no-name cards I was a little wary of their reliability, however I have taken over 1000 shots with these two cards and no problems so far. These cards are proportionally cheaper than 512MB cards and 1GB cards are not much more cost efficient (the fast cards are actually just as expensive). The information posted here shows me that my camera would not be significantly faster with the high speed cards, and therefore thse cheaper cards should be fine for non-critical snapshots (I still trust the Lexar cards to be more reliable and less likely to fail, am I right?)

As for capacity, I understand that you want to get lots of pictures before changing cards, but I did have a CF card fail in a Kodak p&s camera a couple of years ago (a Verbatim card which was replaced under warranty). On that occasion I lost some very nice pictures that could not be recovered. Since then I have felt more comfortable with 2, 3 or 4 small cards than one big one. The largest card I own is 512MB and as long as I own the DL I will not likely go beyond 1GB. A little paranoia isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Ira
Monza76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 9, 2006, 9:25 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 344
Default

Monza76 wrote:
Quote:
As for capacity, I understand that you want to get lots of pictures before changing cards, but I did have a CF card fail in a Kodak p&s camera a couple of years ago (a Verbatim card which was replaced under warranty). On that occasion I lost some very nice pictures that could not be recovered. Since then I have felt more comfortable with 2, 3 or 4 small cards than one big one. The largest card I own is 512MB and as long as I own the DL I will not likely go beyond 1GB. A little paranoia isn't necessarily a bad thing.
The risk factor for having smaller cards is that we may lose the card(s) more easier during swapping and when they are not kept in the safest place, i.e., in the camera :-)

RiceHigh
http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh
RiceHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 9, 2006, 1:21 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Black Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Oxford, CT
Posts: 1,309
Default

RiceHigh wrote:
Quote:
Monza76 wrote:
Quote:
As for capacity, I understand that you want to get lots of pictures before changing cards, but I did have a CF card fail in a Kodak p&s camera a couple of years ago (a Verbatim card which was replaced under warranty). On that occasion I lost some very nice pictures that could not be recovered. Since then I have felt more comfortable with 2, 3 or 4 small cards than one big one. The largest card I own is 512MB and as long as I own the DL I will not likely go beyond 1GB. A little paranoia isn't necessarily a bad thing.
The risk factor for having smaller cards is that we may lose the card(s) more easier during swapping and when they are not kept in the safest place, i.e., in the camera :-)

RiceHigh
http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh

"Rich High" is Correct About That increased Risk Of Mishandling The Card. However i agree with Monza 76. The largest card i own is a 1 gig(Since i only Shot in raw). I refuse To Get a higher capacity For just the reason he mentioned.
I had a friend take a once in a life Time Trip. He had one card go bad and lost a lot of pictures. Luckily It was only a 256M card, So while he lost some, he did not lose his whole vacation. BTW Total Shots for his trip was one GIG:-)
Black Knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 9, 2006, 2:07 PM   #8
Member
 
bright eyes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 94
Default

I really like the idea of this one, a high performance card with a build-in USB connector, very handy feature. It is pricing at C$99 for the 1G capacity at local store here, not too bad. I always like the Sandisk products.

-BE
Attached Images
 
bright eyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 10, 2006, 1:13 AM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 6
Default

I just re-read the review and it said that the buffer stores five frames (@2.5fps)before transferring to the SD card. At an average of 2MB/frame that's 10MB of data to be transferred.

For the standard 1GB Kingston I was contemplating, the vendor told me its write speed was 2MB/s. That would mean a transfer time of 5 sec. I guess I would be ok with waiting 5 sec. between bursts.

Like RiceHigh said, use the money fortwo standard cards, rather thanone high speed card. I can put up with afew more minutesto download to PC from a standard card.

Thanksto all.

One other query just popped up from this discussion: I did not format my 1GB SD card but it still worked to store >350 shots. Was it necessary to format?



imbcsab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 10, 2006, 9:18 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Peacekeeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,024
Default

I sometimes format the card if I want to make sure that everything is off of the card. I never download to my PC from the camera. I use a card reader and save camera battery power.

Recently I was doing some modifications to some photos I took of some old 35mm slides to see if I could get a better image. The photos were on the SD card and I saved them back to the Sd card. The PC created a second folder automatically on the card that my camera doesn't access because it is not in the default DCIM folder.

I noted that when I deleted some older photos and my camera said "No images to display" I had less than my normal 330 image space available. So If you want to make sure it is totally empty then format or just put it in a card reader and use your PC to check to see that everything is deleted.
Peacekeeper 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 5:23 PM.