CF dying?

Alfred Molon wrote:

In article 7a586cf4-fd90-4dc9-93d7-9f2457015b84
@q16g2000yqg.googlegroups.com, Poldie says...

My 4gb CF card holds less than 400 raw (10MB or so 10megapixel)
files. Saying 2GB is plenty is laughable. My card cost £20 including
postage.

400 images on one card is a lot. Even more than that is dangerous, in
case the card goes bad.

And how many times as a card gone bad? ... compared to all those pictures
you was not able to take because you had to change a filled up card?

Over the last 5 years I have take over 100000 pictures and never ever have a
card failed.

The only advantage in smaller cards (ie. 4 Gb cs 16 Gb) is that the smaller
one is a bit faster.

--
Jørn Dahl-Stamnes
http://www.dahl-stamnes.net/dahls/

On 6/2/09 6:27 AM, in article ,
"Gary Edstrom" wrote:

On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 06:50:20 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

Bob Larter wrote:
David J Taylor wrote:
Bob Larter wrote:
[] Having had 30 years of experience in the electronics & computer
industries, my money would be on newer cards being more reliable
than older cards. I can't point you at any serious data on this,
but that's what my gut says.

I would agree, but I still would prefer 4 x 4GB cards than 1 x 16GB
(for a trip of more than a day or two).

Well, givn that a 4GB card is enough for me to get a few hundred
RAW+JPEG shots, that works for me too. ;^)

I don't do RAW, so I have a little more margin. G

David

I just got back from a trip where I used RAW format 100% of the time.
It's great, but it really takes the memory! For my Canon 50D, CR2 raw
files average 20.7 megs. Converting them to DNG format takes the
average down to 16.2 megs. Good old high quality JPG format takes it
way down to 5.8 megs.

That means that I can only store about 207 CR2 files on a DVD. I guess
it's about time to invest in a BlueRay drive!

Gary
Naw. Just get a DL drive. A LOT cheaper for both drive and media...

On 2009-06-02 05:10:00 -0700, Jørn Dahl-Stamnes
said:

Alfred Molon wrote:

In article 7a586cf4-fd90-4dc9-93d7-9f2457015b84
@q16g2000yqg.googlegroups.com, Poldie says...

My 4gb CF card holds less than 400 raw (10MB or so 10megapixel)
files. Saying 2GB is plenty is laughable. My card cost £20 including
postage.

400 images on one card is a lot. Even more than that is dangerous, in
case the card goes bad.

And how many times as a card gone bad? ... compared to all those pictures
you was not able to take because you had to change a filled up card?

Over the last 5 years I have take over 100000 pictures and never ever have a
card failed.

The only advantage in smaller cards (ie. 4 Gb cs 16 Gb) is that the smaller
one is a bit faster.

Agreed.
I use CF exclusively, having CF cards ranging from 128MB to 8GB with no
failures.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article , Gary Edstrom
says...

That means that I can only store about 207 CR2 files on a DVD. I guess
it's about time to invest in a BlueRay drive!

That is the solution, but Bluray media are still ridicolously expensive.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

In article , David J
Taylor says...

I don't do RAW, so I have a little more margin. G

You should if you are serious about photography.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

In article , David J
Taylor says...

It's nice if you can, but you don't necessarily want to have to take a
computer round with you for a short trip, if a camera alone will suffice.

Actually I never travel without a computer. It's a Lenovo X200, light
and portable. If I do not shoot any photos I use it to check my emails.

Given that there are cheap and light netbooks (which accept huge HDDs) I
see no reason why anybody would not want to carry a small computer when
travelling. And a photographer might want to review the photos in the
evening.

How many times in recent year have you had a good name brand CF or SD card
go bad on you?

In 2003 a CF card got corrupted, loss of the data (partial recovery with
a utility possible). Later the pins of the CF slot of a card reader got
bent and it was no longer possible to insert CF cards into it.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

In article , Jørn Dahl-Stamnes says...

And how many times as a card gone bad? ... compared to all those pictures
you was not able to take because you had to change a filled up card?

Happened once to me.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

Alfred Molon wrote:
In article , David J
Taylor says...

I don't do RAW, so I have a little more margin. G

You should if you are serious about photography.

I have once or twice, but being an ex-slide film user, I try to get the
exposure right in the camera every time.

Cheers,
David

Alfred Molon wrote:
[]
Actually I never travel without a computer. It's a Lenovo X200, light
and portable. If I do not shoot any photos I use it to check my
emails.

Do you never go on holiday? To me, there is something wrong if you cannot
do without e-mails for a few days, from time to time.

Given that there are cheap and light netbooks (which accept huge
HDDs) I see no reason why anybody would not want to carry a small
computer when travelling. And a photographer might want to review the
photos in the evening.

The average netbook is under-powered, its display is, I feel, too small,
and the lack of DVD read-write a distinct disadvantage. Consequently I
would recommend an 12-inch notebook with at least a dual-core processor
and 2GB of memory.

How many times in recent year have you had a good name brand CF or
SD card go bad on you?

In 2003 a CF card got corrupted, loss of the data (partial recovery
with a utility possible). Later the pins of the CF slot of a card
reader got bent and it was no longer possible to insert CF cards into
it.

That was rather a long time ago. But you said "got corrupted". Did you
determine what actually happened? I was pleased to move from CF to SD
cards partially because of the potential of the bent pin problem. I've
seen bent pins, but on CPUs rather than CF-readers.

Cheers,
David

"George Kerby" wrote in message
...



On 6/2/09 6:27 AM, in article ,
"Gary Edstrom" wrote:

On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 06:50:20 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

Bob Larter wrote:
David J Taylor wrote:
Bob Larter wrote:
[] Having had 30 years of experience in the electronics & computer
industries, my money would be on newer cards being more reliable
than older cards. I can't point you at any serious data on this,
but that's what my gut says.

I would agree, but I still would prefer 4 x 4GB cards than 1 x 16GB
(for a trip of more than a day or two).

Well, givn that a 4GB card is enough for me to get a few hundred
RAW+JPEG shots, that works for me too. ;^)

I don't do RAW, so I have a little more margin. G

David

I just got back from a trip where I used RAW format 100% of the time.
It's great, but it really takes the memory! For my Canon 50D, CR2 raw
files average 20.7 megs. Converting them to DNG format takes the
average down to 16.2 megs. Good old high quality JPG format takes it
way down to 5.8 megs.

That means that I can only store about 207 CR2 files on a DVD. I guess
it's about time to invest in a BlueRay drive!

Gary
Naw. Just get a DL drive. A LOT cheaper for both drive and media...

Just buy a couple of WD Passport 500GB drives. They are powered off a
laptops USB port, are about the size of a 1/2" thick passport, cost $120 and
can store 24,000+ 20.7mb images. Use two drives for redundancy and it will
cost you about 1 cent per image to store those 20.7 mb raw files.

Ron