Thanks Rob. That's pretty much what I thought, although many here have tried to make a case for SD. And that's why I've had a hard time embracing SD as the format we have to live with. Give me back my CF cards! Paul On Jul 19, 2007, at 7:48 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
> On 20/07/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Interesting. I wonder why the CF cards are more than twice as fast >> as the SD card. > > It's much easier to design a fast CF card, different interface > electronics, more direct electrical connection more physical space for > memory chips so the designers can configure them to act in parallel. > CF is still the pro preferred format, they are generally faster, > cheaper and higher capacity than SD and have less interface > compatibility issues. > > -- > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://picasaweb.google.com/distudio/PESO > http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
