Usually, when I transfer data from my card to my PC, I do a move
rather than a copy.
Why? Easier. Never had a problem like it wouldn't work unless I format
in the camera or whetever. So I move PEFs. Move means deleting which
means writing as well (tiny little data but a write is a write).
That
Yes, void is an English word that can be used as a verb or noun. A
void is an empty space, to void something is to zero or empty it.
What you're doing with a move or delete on flash memory is almost
invariably simply voiding the file entry in the FAT directory
structure, not writing zeros
Yes, void is an English word that can be used as a verb or noun. A
void is an empty space, to void something is to zero or empty it.
Good to know , thanks !
What you're doing with a move or delete on flash memory is almost
invariably simply voiding the file entry in the FAT directory
I wouldn't want more than 4GB on a single card, even with RAW files
of 20GB or so (which is what I'm anticipating for the new camera).
Err - make that 20 *MB* or so. Sheesh.
I'll be disappointed in they don't add lossless compression on the
RAW file format for the new camera. It's
- Original Message -
From: Brian Dipert
Subject: Re: Upcoming 10 Mpixel DSLR
My reason for earlier asking about the storage card format of the upcoming
10 Mpixel DSLR is that I just bought a new *ist D on clearance from Amazon
for $1199, as a backup for my existing *ist D. Here's
On 20 Mar 2006 at 6:50, William Robb wrote:
SD cards are getting up in capacity now. I've not ever considered anything
bigger than 1gb cards as being desirable. Too many eggs in one basket for my
taste.
The RAW eggs will be bigger than the *ist D's though.
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE
Rob Studdert wrote on 20.03.06 15:17:
The RAW eggs will be bigger than the *ist D's though.
On D200 compressed RAW (NEF) takes approx. 15.8 MB - not that much more than
RAWs from *istD ;-) I guess if new D would save RAWs in .DNG format these
files would be even smaller than that.
--
Balance
Hi Rob,
I guess everyone has their preferences ;-)) At this point, even if the new
D files were 20mb, I'd be happy with a 2GB card as a max That's still
around 100 exposures or so - plenty on a single card as far as I'm
concerned.
While I can't say I'd ~never~ use a 4GB card, I don't think it
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
Rob Studdert wrote on 20.03.06 15:17:
The RAW eggs will be bigger than the *ist D's though.
On D200 compressed RAW (NEF) takes approx. 15.8 MB - not that much more than
RAWs from *istD ;-) I guess if new D would save RAWs in .DNG format these
files would be even
On 20 Mar 2006 at 10:31, Mark Roberts wrote:
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
On D200 compressed RAW (NEF) takes approx. 15.8 MB - not that much more than
RAWs from *istD ;-) I guess if new D would save RAWs in .DNG format these
files would be even smaller than that.
Even with the ist-D RAW
Mark Roberts wrote on 20.03.06 16:31:
Even with the ist-D RAW files, a 2 Gig card is my standard now.
Mine too, and actually Sandisk Ultra II SD 2GB is now a bit cheaper in
Poland than the same as CF ;-)
--
Balance is the ultimate good...
Best Regards
Sylwek
On Mar 19, 2006, at 8:53 PM, Brian Dipert wrote:
My reason for earlier asking about the storage card format of the
upcoming
10 Mpixel DSLR is that I just bought a new *ist D on clearance from
Amazon
for $1199, as a backup for my existing *ist D. Here's where I'm torn:
1) 10 Mpixel
Microdrives are only available in CF form factor,
but their capacity/price and speed advantage has been compromised by
recent flash developments, while their disadvantages in terms of
mechanical fragility and power consumption have not changed.
Very true but keep in mind that if long term is
On Mar 20, 2006, at 8:26 AM, Thibouille wrote:
Microdrives are only available in CF form factor,
but their capacity/price and speed advantage has been compromised by
recent flash developments, while their disadvantages in terms of
mechanical fragility and power consumption have not changed.
On Mar 20, 2006, at 8:26 AM, Thibouille wrote:
Microdrives are only available in CF form factor,
but their capacity/price and speed advantage has been compromised by
recent flash developments, while their disadvantages in terms of
mechanical fragility and power consumption have not changed.
Which depends on your use.
Don't forget you have to empty the cards too.
But I agree a normal user shouldn't worry.
Now, we aren't here, normal users, so we still should know about that.
Don't forget an MTBF is just that ... an MTBF.
Regards ;)
--
Thibouille
On Mar 20, 2006, at 10:27 AM, Thibouille wrote:
Which depends on your use.
Don't forget you have to empty the cards too.
Not sure I understand. Reading from flash memory does not affect the
life of the components as the energy involved is very small compared
to writing, all you're doing
Judging from the photos here:
www.dpreview.com/articles/pma2006/Pentax/
I'm guesstimating the upcoming (??) 10 Mpixel DSLR from Pentax/Samsung will
take SD cards, NOT CompactFlash cards (and, therefore, not MicroDrives).
Anyone concur/disagree?
Regards
- Original Message -
From: Brian Dipert
Subject: Upcoming 10 Mpixel DSLR
Judging from the photos here:
www.dpreview.com/articles/pma2006/Pentax/
I'm guesstimating the upcoming (??) 10 Mpixel DSLR from Pentax/Samsung
will
take SD cards, NOT CompactFlash cards (and, therefore
That's the consensus opinion. It'll work.
Paul
On Mar 19, 2006, at 7:59 PM, Brian Dipert wrote:
Judging from the photos here:
www.dpreview.com/articles/pma2006/Pentax/
I'm guesstimating the upcoming (??) 10 Mpixel DSLR from Pentax/Samsung
will
take SD cards, NOT CompactFlash cards
On 3/19/06 7:59 PM, Brian Dipert, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm guesstimating the upcoming (??) 10 Mpixel DSLR from Pentax/Samsung will
take SD cards, NOT CompactFlash cards (and, therefore, not MicroDrives).
That's what most of the folks in Japan concluded.
Works for me :-).
Ken
On Mar 19, 2006, at 4:59 PM, Brian Dipert wrote:
Judging from the photos here:
www.dpreview.com/articles/pma2006/Pentax/
I'm guesstimating the upcoming (??) 10 Mpixel DSLR from Pentax/
Samsung will
take SD cards, NOT CompactFlash cards (and, therefore, not
MicroDrives).
Anyone
I have 9 GB of CF cards, and am seriously peeved at Pentax for
treating those of us who stepped forward and bought the *ist D
in this way. Pentax could have designed the camera to take both
CF and SD.
Joe
I have a lot of CF cards. They will suffice for my backup camera. Not a
problem.
Paul
On Mar 19, 2006, at 10:00 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote:
I have 9 GB of CF cards, and am seriously peeved at Pentax for
treating those of us who stepped forward and bought the *ist D in this
way. Pentax could
the photos here:
www.dpreview.com/articles/pma2006/Pentax/
I'm guesstimating the upcoming (??) 10 Mpixel DSLR from Pentax/Samsung
will
take SD cards, NOT CompactFlash cards (and, therefore, not MicroDrives).
Anyone concur/disagree?
Regards,
==
Brian Dipert
On Mar 19, 2006, at 10:00 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote:
I have 9 GB of CF cards, and am seriously peeved at Pentax for
treating those of us who stepped forward and bought the *ist D in this
way.
Maybe Pentax doesn't think you're going to throw away your *ist D?
If you sell your D when you
Storage cards are a commodity. What you paid $200 for last year is
worth $60 new today, less really since they're used now. They'll be
worth less next year too. If you didn't get your $200 value out of
them already, well, that's not Pentax' fault. Whatever you have isn't
worth what you
On 3/19/06 10:00 PM, Joseph Tainter, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pentax could have designed the camera to take both
CF and SD.
Maybe, but I shiver every time I peep into the CF card slot with all the
forest of thin gold pins sticking up.
The CF slot of my G3 suddenly crushed just a couple of pins
On 19 Mar 2006 at 20:00, Joseph Tainter wrote:
I have 9 GB of CF cards, and am seriously peeved at Pentax for
treating those of us who stepped forward and bought the *ist D
in this way. Pentax could have designed the camera to take both
CF and SD.
No point saying that here unless you get
My reason for earlier asking about the storage card format of the upcoming
10 Mpixel DSLR is that I just bought a new *ist D on clearance from Amazon
for $1199, as a backup for my existing *ist D. Here's where I'm torn:
1) 10 Mpixel resolution will certainly be helpful when doing extreme
tax in NYC) on top of the camera price tag.
i wouldn't pay more for either sd or cf storage, unless i already had
10GB worth of it.
best,
mishka
On 3/19/06, Brian Dipert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My reason for earlier asking about the storage card format of the upcoming
10 Mpixel DSLR is that I
Hi!
buy an imagetank, or an ipod, or something like that and stop worrying about
CF vs SD vs whatever. much more cost effective too. 1GB gard in either format
will set you off by about $50-60 these days. buy two, and swap them
as needed -- that's about $120 (or 10% of *istd price, basically,
.
There are, supposedly, some differences in the default settings
for JPEG conversion - I haven't been able to confirm this myself.
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 08:53:09PM -0800, Brian Dipert wrote:
My reason for earlier asking about the storage card format of the upcoming
10 Mpixel DSLR is that I just
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 01:02:40AM -0500, John Francis wrote:
I wouldn't want more than 4GB on a single card, even with RAW files
of 20GB or so (which is what I'm anticipating for the new camera).
Err - make that 20 *MB* or so. Sheesh.
34 matches
Mail list logo
