I sent this yesterday but did not go through > I'm veering towards the S2 but not making my mind up till after I've had a > play with it and the D60. I know one or two cards have been mentioned but > which are the fastest then? Are there any recommended cards for the S2, D60 > and D100 or doesn't the make of the camera and model make a difference?
CF makers have made good efforts to comply to common manufacturing rules, and there can be some independence of brands for your choice. However, you may have heard of some recurrent brands like Lexar, Microtech and the like, which are all good ones and fast ones. People talk about continued use for 2-3 years of such CF cards without problems and this is quite relevant info. Microdrives have mixed reports. To start with, they have moving parts and create heat inside the camera. Actually I guess it is Calumet the store currently making an offer to get the Lexar cards ( 324 or 512 Mb) and getting the Firewire card reader for free, saving some 50$ in the deal. Regardless of brands and camera you finally choose, Shangarah , DO get a Firewire card reader. Forget about USB transfer and whatever software those camera makers include to deal with USB handling. IT is SLOOOOW. > Is it possible to find out or is it already known whether the plug-in can > deal with S2 RAW files? DPreview seems to think that the honeycombed sensors > may cause a problem for software writers. S2 files have had more delay than the rest, to be included in third party software, maybe that is the reason, but I don't know for sure. I think you will do better by contacting your Adobe fellows, or even Mr.Knoll himself and find out about this much faster than us, common mortals. I can't remember what did they say about the S2 or if they said anything specific at all. Sorry. I was too thrilled at the news about the handling of Canon files, since it is a major pain to deal with the Canon's Raw Image Converter(RIC) as the only choice in Mac systems ( There is a beta code for OSX with good reviews, but it is equally slow, with OSX being of no help at all to improve speed, if compared to the ability of Windows systems to work with Raw data in seconds, as compared to minutes in the Macs). I am a Mac user so you should know how this hurts. There is no point of comparison. A fast Mac may take up some 50-60 seconds to process one Raw file in the RIC and produce a 16Bit tiff file, while the PC's will process no less than 10 files in the same time. If you have 900 files to process, then the math is simple. I assume this has to do with Raw format being native to PeeCees, camera's systems to be some sort of DOS,etc,etc. Some photographers have even bought PC boxes just to deal with their Raw data . Comments and performance on the Beta Raw PlugIn for Photoshop in Macs were very promising and we are all looking forward to this Launch. I don't care about a "nice or friendly" interfase, I don't care about OSX Aqua Crap , I want speed. All the best. Jorge Parra APA/ASMP www.jorgeparra.com =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
