CF card reader reading speed


Status
Not open for further replies.
Sep 30, 2007
54
0
0
#1
hi... just curious to know, is it normal for my card reader to take 1 hour to copy over 4gb of photos (including raw files)? I'm using the sandisk extreme III 4gb card. my cf card reader is kinda old (over 6 years), not even sure if it is usb II. if it can be faster, i'd want to get a new card reader... pls advise me.. thanks! :)
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#2
You probably have the USB1.1 or even 1.0 card readers. I suggest you either hook up your camera directly to the PC, or get a high-speed USB2.0 card reader like the Sandisk Imagemate (I transfer 8GB of RAW files in a couple minutes). DO NOT trust the el-cheapo $10 card readers that say "USB 2.0"; they're just saying that you can use the reader on a USB 2.0 port, but not that you have the speed.
 

Sep 19, 2006
608
0
0
East
www.flickr.com
#3
I guess it is abnormal. Nver had this problem; my 8GB card transferred 500+ images within 20 mins (I guess).
 

Sep 30, 2007
54
0
0
#4
oh no.. i just asked my friend to buy for me the cheapest usb2 reader she can find... she bought for me a lexcron card reader.. its the $12 one.. looks like i bought the wrong stuff again... :(
 

Sep 30, 2007
54
0
0
#5
hi.. i tested the new lexcron card reader, the speed is significantly faster than my old reader. but i'm just wondering if the sandisk readers are even faster...

i tried to upload 140mb (around 6 jpg + 6 raw files) of data from my sandisk extreme III, it took around 50 seconds, is this normal? or will it be faster if i use the sandisk reader as recommended by Rashkae?

btw, using my old reader, the same files took around 3 minutes to copy over...
 

Last edited:

cater

New Member
Apr 12, 2007
434
0
0
#6
hi.. i tested the new lexcron card reader, the speed is significantly faster than my old reader. but i'm just wondering if the sandisk readers are even faster...

i tried to upload 140mb (around 6 jpg + 6 raw files) of data from my sandisk extreme III, it took around 50 seconds, is this normal? or will it be faster if i use the sandisk reader as recommended by Rashkae?

btw, using my old reader, the same files took around 3 minutes to copy over...
Is about there not forgotting actual speed take into consideration of your PCs & HDD speed as well as software application that is running to import & file ur pics. So 50sec for 6 raw + 6 jpg is acceptable.
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#7
hi.. i tested the new lexcron card reader, the speed is significantly faster than my old reader. but i'm just wondering if the sandisk readers are even faster...

i tried to upload 140mb (around 6 jpg + 6 raw files) of data from my sandisk extreme III, it took around 50 seconds, is this normal? or will it be faster if i use the sandisk reader as recommended by Rashkae?

btw, using my old reader, the same files took around 3 minutes to copy over...
140MB in 5 secs means 28MB/s. This is a very good speed already. :thumbsup:
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#9
He mentioned 50 seconds... which gives 2.8MB/s .. not really a fast transfer.
Oh!!! Pffft, I think I need to make sure to have coffee *before* surfing CS. :D

Yeah, 2.8MB/s is not fast at all. You should get about 20MB/s from a good reader. Even hooking up your camera directly should be faster; the A700 can hit 21MB/s. What's your camera?
 

Sep 30, 2007
54
0
0
#10
oh... which means i've got a crappy reader once again... :(

my camera is the 400D..

any idea how much does the sandisk card reader costs (& sold at)? i walked around sim lim, but it seems like most of the readers on display are those cheapo ones... i think i'll probably get the sandisk imagemate that Rashkae mentioned...
 

teebs

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2008
1,358
0
36
43
#12
Just a word of advice, the USB 2.0 allows for a max transfer speed of up to 480Mb/sec (Mbits) which is equivalent to 60MB/Sec (MBytes).

The actual transfer rate achieved is dependant on a combination of different factors: your computer's processor speed, the USB port or hub, and the speed of the flash memory device being accessed.

A review of the actual transfer rates achieved with the Sandisk Imagemate Reader is in the link below.

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-7883-7912

And one other thing, if you are looking for a fast card reader for CF cards, make sure the reader has stated explictly compliance to cf 3.0 and cf 4.0/4.1 standards. The Sandisk Extreme 3 is compliant to CF 3.0 standard while the Sandisk Extreme 4 is compliant to CF 4.1 standards.
 

Last edited:

Octarine

Moderator
Staff member
Jan 3, 2008
12,491
26
48
Pasir Ris
#13
Never tried direct transfer from my 350D. It requires installation of some additional drivers since the cam won't be recognized as USB storage device. Never bothered about it, used USB card readers straight away. Have a Kingston CF reader that gives me 12-13MB/s, considering my old PC I'm happy with that.
 

genegoh

Senior Member
Mar 20, 2006
649
0
16
Simei
www.photosbymarbles.com
#14
I would recommend getting the Sandisk card reader. I know it's a little pricey, but it'll be worth every cent.
Got mine some time back and no regrets whatsoever.
 

lennyl

New Member
Mar 27, 2008
1,520
0
0
Northern California
#15
Don't forget your system's performance affects transfer speed as well. Mainly : system chipset and hard disk speed.

There's no clear information available on what card reader performs better than others. Part of the problem is that there are so many readers out there, and they don't tell you what chipset they use. Some chipsets perform better than others. Your only guarantee is to buy brand name readers that guarantee performance with their own flash cards (and even then it still depends on your system). Otherwise it is basically lottery.

Because you're using the Extreme III, there's no need to get the UDMA enabled readers, as it won't benefit your card. It won't hurt, of course (other than your wallet).
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom