Dilemma in upgrading image storage


Status
Not open for further replies.

tomshen

Senior Member
Feb 20, 2002
3,644
0
36
Singapore
#1
I need bigger CF/Micro drive for shooting RAW mode. But somehow I sense that there will be a release of new and bigger CF/MD SOON. I am not in a hurry to get it but I also dun want to wait ages. Presently I use a 340MB MD + 10G Image Tank.

So should I or shouldn't I upgrade to a 1GB/512MB CF now? Your opinions welcome.
 

Wai

Senior Member
Jan 17, 2002
5,270
0
36
39
South Pole with Penguin
singastro.org
#2
1GB CF expensive leh

why not upgrade your 340MB MD to 1GB??
1GB one is definitely much faster and use less power....

but i have too many IDE harddisks died on me (abt two dozens till now)....so i am still very worry about using MD
 

tomshen

Senior Member
Feb 20, 2002
3,644
0
36
Singapore
#3
I made a mistake, I meant 1GB MD/512MB CF. I know 1GB CF is very expensive, out of my reach.
 

Larry

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2002
5,499
0
0
45
singapore
www.larryloh.com
#4
inside news... wait a while tom, they're releasing the new 5Gb and 10Gb CF cards soon... so the 1Gb ones will probably drop in price.

also, there's talk of a 10/20Gb thumbdrive to be launched that can be plugged straight into cameras. not sure how true that is...
 

Wai

Senior Member
Jan 17, 2002
5,270
0
36
39
South Pole with Penguin
singastro.org
#6
Originally posted by Larry

also, there's talk of a 10/20Gb thumbdrive to be launched that can be plugged straight into cameras. not sure how true that is...
wah...10-20GB....no need image tank anymore :D

but thumbdrive?? use USB port?? DSLR can use meh???

for me, i always plug out the CF card to a USB reader and use as data storage also....therefore using MD is too risky for me...
 

YSLee

Senior Member
Jan 17, 2002
2,326
1
38
Visit site
#7
Heh, 512 CF is more than enough. It'll be enough for at least 50 RAW photos, me thinks. And if you shoot in JPEG, it's plenty plenty! And you still have that image tank.
 

Larry

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2002
5,499
0
0
45
singapore
www.larryloh.com
#8
Originally posted by Wai
but thumbdrive?? use USB port?? DSLR can use meh???
dunno oso... haven't seen it yet, just some industry rumours. but it's targetting at the image storage market so i think there should be some way to plug in directly. at least that's what i hear...
 

#9
Originally posted by YSLee
Heh, 512 CF is more than enough. It'll be enough for at least 50 RAW photos, me thinks. And if you shoot in JPEG, it's plenty plenty! And you still have that image tank.
Methinks can store at least 80 RAW files. And although you get a lot more processing options shooting in RAW, in most situations, methinks JPEG FINE is more than good enough. No? :)

Regards
Ck
 

denizenx

Senior Member
Feb 1, 2002
4,058
0
0
41
L2TPYSG
Visit site
#10
Originally posted by Larry
dunno oso... haven't seen it yet, just some industry rumours. but it's targetting at the image storage market so i think there should be some way to plug in directly. at least that's what i hear...
LOL so next time we'll be carrying a body bp, a flash bp and a storage pack?
 

StreetShooter

Senior Member
Jan 17, 2002
4,634
0
0
Katong
streetshooter.clubsnap.org
#12
Funny. I just did some tests last weekend and discovered for myself the benefits of RAW, especially for high ISO shots. Been thinking of getting a 1G MD or 512CF as well. Here are some of my considerations:

1G MD:

1. Reliability - risk of losing data if dropped or removed from card reader while still spinning.

2. Cost - cheaper per MB.

3. Speed is slower for writing.

4. Capacity obviously greater.

512MB CF:

No worries about speed or reliability. Bit expensive.

256 MB CF:

No worries about speed or reliability. Cheap ($120). Since I already have a 256 MB card, I could alternate between the two, saving to the Image Tank in the meantime. Not much difference from changing rolls of film (not that I would know anything about that).

Don't upgrade:

Use jpg for normal daytime shots, use RAW for high ISO shots but take shots more selectively instead of machine-gun style.
 

Knighthunter

Senior Member
Sep 13, 2002
958
0
16
44
Pigeon Hole in Mandalay
#13
I'm using 1GB MD for my camera, I can take 317pics in JPEG Fine, 112 in RAW and only 60 pics in TIFF. I am always using JPEG fine most of the time since I intend to use my shots as is plus slight tuning. I can't deal with RAW/TIFF shoots, consume too much time for post production processing and storage space. Overall I am quite satisfy with my MD performance except for the first shot out when I lost half of my data due to accidental formatting.
 

enivre

New Member
Nov 7, 2002
1,958
0
0
36
www.ervinelin.com
#15
Originally posted by StreetShooter
256 MB CF:

No worries about speed or reliability. Cheap ($120).
Confirm $120??? From where??

Oh yar, is the image tank a good investment?
 

Oct 6, 2002
162
0
16
Singapore
Visit site
#16
Originally posted by Larry
dunno oso... haven't seen it yet, just some industry rumours. but it's targetting at the image storage market so i think there should be some way to plug in directly. at least that's what i hear...
The capacity of the thumbdrive doesn't matter coz you can't use it on the camera anyway. Even if it does, it's juts out like a syringe. Downright ugly and fragile.
 

megaweb

Moderator
Staff member
Jan 17, 2002
8,541
3
38
East
megaweb.clubsnap.org
#17
oops ... :D I own a 512M Ridata CF as well as a 1 Gig IBM Microdrive. Below is my comparison between these 2 media

For D60 ISO 100 6M pixel ,
512M Ridata CF = 66 RAW files
1 Gig IBM Microdrive = 144 RAW files

512M Ridata CF over 1 Gig IBM Microdrive
1. write faster (useful when u take action shots like fireworks)
2. lesser heat
3. rugged (no worry when drop on the floor)

1 Gig IBM Microdrive over 512M Ridata CF
1. can store twice or more pictures (useful when u take still life shots)
2. cost effective (cheaper)
 

Oct 6, 2002
162
0
16
Singapore
Visit site
#18
Originally posted by StreetShooter
Funny. I just did some tests last weekend and discovered for myself the benefits of RAW, especially for high ISO shots. Been thinking of getting a 1G MD or 512CF as well. Here are some of my considerations:

1G MD:

1. Reliability - risk of losing data if dropped or removed from card reader while still spinning.

2. Cost - cheaper per MB.

3. Speed is slower for writing.

4. Capacity obviously greater.

512MB CF:

No worries about speed or reliability. Bit expensive.

256 MB CF:

No worries about speed or reliability. Cheap ($120). Since I already have a 256 MB card, I could alternate between the two, saving to the Image Tank in the meantime. Not much difference from changing rolls of film (not that I would know anything about that).

Don't upgrade:

Use jpg for normal daytime shots, use RAW for high ISO shots but take shots more selectively instead of machine-gun style.
You sure MD writes slower? In fact, MD's advantage is the writing is faster than any CF card around. Only the reading is slower compared to some CF, but it's among the top.

Take a look at this article:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/mediacompare/
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom