![]() |
|
|
#1 |
|
New Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: East
Posts: 43
|
Can anyone recommend the fastest & most reliable CFII with S2 Pro?
Thank you in advance. Cheers |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 13,397
|
not too sure why you want CF II but there are fast CF I cards around.
check this out: http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/mul...?cid=6007-6014 for performance of CF I and CF II cards tested. do take note of that the difference in write times may not translate to significant real-life experience. e.g. if a file is 3MB, it'll take 1.7s to write to the fastest card right now on the list (Sandisk Extreme 1GB) and 1.88s to write to a cheaper card like Transcend 45x 1GB. Last edited by mpenza; 10th December 2003 at 10:15 AM. |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: There lor~
Posts: 4,843
|
Just my personal view.
If the card going to stay in the camera all the time, my best bad will be the Microdrive. Cheap and relatively fast. Since S2 support Firewire, I'm sure the transfer speed to the Pc thru the Camera will be fast enough. |
|
|
| Sponsored Link |
|
|
#4 |
|
Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: East
Posts: 689
|
Yes, Microdrive! S2 was designed for it.
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 972
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,090
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: East
Posts: 689
|
It furthermore support Smart Media too! |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Jakarta
Posts: 41
|
it is NOT as fragile as a lot of people say. It writes faster than most CFs
I have been using mine for almost a year with no problem at all.Not even bad sector. |
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 972
|
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: East
Posts: 689
|
Hey Airphoto38 & SFHuang,
Forgot to mention that the S2 support up to 2G because of the software bits addressing for storage capacity. Therefore its safer to use the IBM microdrive should you decide on it. Happy snapping ![]() |
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
New Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: East
Posts: 43
|
Just to share.........
I have bought the IBM 1GBMD and used it on 3024 x 2016 pixels.(2.2MB) After capturing, need to wait for quite a while before the image appear on the LCD for viewing. Wondering if this is the appropiate pixels(2.2MB) to set or should I set it to a lower pixels(1.3MB) for A4 print only. Thanx |
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 655
|
Secondly, you are confusing size ( 2.2MB, 1.3MB ) with resolution. Size of the file in MB is a function of the resolution AND the JPG compression. So 2 files of the same resolution and different quality level will have vastly different size. If you are running out of space on your CF card, it's better to drop quality first, before dropping resolution. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 | |
|
Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: East
Posts: 689
|
I have the same configuration and always shoot at 6mb pixels. However I dont downsize it as I believe the hight quality provides me better details visually. If you are low on storage, its better to get another 512 or 1GB piece. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: UP NORTH
Posts: 714
|
as for me my 1GB MD is always in my camera. i do my transfer via firewire, only once in a blue moon i transfer via adapter..
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|