On 2/12/02 13:16, "Larry Berman" wrote: > Because they're not as stable as solid state CompactFlash media.... If you > follow the professional DSLR forums, there is mention of lost data from the > Microdrive much more frequently than CompactFlash.
I'd say that this was a slightly misleading point. Yes Compact Flash is more sturdy than a Microdrive, in the same way that a Cheiftan Tank is more sturdy than a Ford Escort. However the Ford Escort is plenty sturdy enough for most peoples uses. (no I don't drive one :-) [tank or Escort!] I have used two microdrives (340Mb) for nearly two years now without a single problem (touch wood, quickly) And in that time they've shot plenty of frames. I've even dropped them on various occasions, though this is obviously not recommended. Yes with a compact flash card, you could actually throw it against the wall and it would survive, but for most people this is not a requirement. Personally I'd buy the microdrives every single time, the cost alone is too much of an incentive. And the capacity/speed ain't the worst around. But each to his own. Paul -- Paul Tansley Fashion & Beauty Photography London +44 (0) 7973 669584 http://www.paultansley.com =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
