Olympus 8080, CF v. xD media selection?

Jim Kent wrote:
I'm on the verge of buying an Olympus 8080, and am wondering about
choice of storage. First, microdrive is out; don't want one of those.
That leaves xD and Compact Flash, and within CF, whether to choose a
standard or "ultra" type. I've searched everywhere to see if anyone
has quantized the difference, if any, in camera performance with these
media, but have come up empty. However, it seems that if the camera
supports xD, which apparently writes at something around 9MByte/sec,
if should support the higher writing speed of the "ultra" CF that
writes at about the same speed as xD. But then again, maybe not, and
the extra expense for the faster CF is wasted. I would prefer to
stick with CF mainly because it's much more widely supported than xD
and I already have readers on a few computers I own. Also, the cost
per byte is much more favorable for the CF, even the 'ultra' types,
compared to xD so I could afford more capacity. What worries me is
that sometime after I buy all this I'll discover that the camera speed
actually *is* degraded by not using the xD for some
not-so-readily-apparent reason. I tend to shoot things like wildlife
where camera speed actually does matter so I don't want to screw this
up on my already-stretched budget.

The 8080 limits the write speed to CF cards to 0.9 MByte/s - that's not
much.

With the 8080 the write speed to xD cards is even slower. Since xD cards
are more expensive, the only reason to use them is if you want to use
the in-built panorama function.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/
Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html

Jim Kent wrote:
I'm on the verge of buying an Olympus 8080, and am wondering about
choice of storage. First, microdrive is out; don't want one of those.
That leaves xD and Compact Flash, and within CF, whether to choose a
standard or "ultra" type. I've searched everywhere to see if anyone
has quantized the difference, if any, in camera performance with these
media, but have come up empty. However, it seems that if the camera
supports xD, which apparently writes at something around 9MByte/sec,
if should support the higher writing speed of the "ultra" CF that
writes at about the same speed as xD. But then again, maybe not, and
the extra expense for the faster CF is wasted. I would prefer to
stick with CF mainly because it's much more widely supported than xD
and I already have readers on a few computers I own. Also, the cost
per byte is much more favorable for the CF, even the 'ultra' types,
compared to xD so I could afford more capacity. What worries me is
that sometime after I buy all this I'll discover that the camera speed
actually *is* degraded by not using the xD for some
not-so-readily-apparent reason. I tend to shoot things like wildlife
where camera speed actually does matter so I don't want to screw this
up on my already-stretched budget.

The 8080 limits the write speed to CF cards to 0.9 MByte/s - that's not
much.

With the 8080 the write speed to xD cards is even slower. Since xD cards
are more expensive, the only reason to use them is if you want to use
the in-built panorama function.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/
Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html

"Jim Kent" wrote in message
...
I'm on the verge of buying an Olympus 8080, and am wondering about
choice of storage. First, microdrive is out; don't want one of those.
That leaves xD and Compact Flash, and within CF, whether to choose a
standard or "ultra" type. I've searched everywhere to see if anyone
has quantized the difference, if any, in camera performance with these
media, but have come up empty. However, it seems that if the camera
supports xD, which apparently writes at something around 9MByte/sec,
if should support the higher writing speed of the "ultra" CF that
writes at about the same speed as xD. But then again, maybe not, and
the extra expense for the faster CF is wasted. I would prefer to
stick with CF mainly because it's much more widely supported than xD
and I already have readers on a few computers I own. Also, the cost
per byte is much more favorable for the CF, even the 'ultra' types,
compared to xD so I could afford more capacity. What worries me is
that sometime after I buy all this I'll discover that the camera speed
actually *is* degraded by not using the xD for some
not-so-readily-apparent reason. I tend to shoot things like wildlife
where camera speed actually does matter so I don't want to screw this
up on my already-stretched budget.

Can anyone help me out here? Thanks!

I don't think that there will be any discernable differences in speed
between the two. I would lean toward CF mainly on the cost difference. Why
don't you use both? That's the benefit of having 2 slots, twice the
capacity before changing cards. I use an Oly E20. I always have a 128M SM
as a supplement to my CF cards. Doesn't hold too many pictures, about 32,
but enough to keep you shooting for a little longer.
Any reader that can read CF(which should be most of them), can read xD with
the available adapter.

Regards,

Ron

In article , Ron Zeis
wrote:

I don't think that there will be any discernable differences in speed
between the two.

I'm sorry to disagree, but there have been many speed comparisons done
betwen Compact Flash, and xD cards in Olympus Cameras. A fast Compact
flash card will almost cut the write speed in half, at a fraction of
the price of xD.
Just pick up th minimun xD card you would want for panoramas, and
emergency backup, and get a good high speed Compact Flash card for the
other slot.
xD is a "dumb" medium, similar to "Smart" media. Compact Flash
includes circuitry within the card to speed things up.
http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/c5050/c5050-card.html , among others.
Believe me, I have done a lot of research in this area, as I love
Olympus cameras, but have very little respect for their choice of
Memory. Ask yourself why they would even include a compact flash slot
in their cameras if xD was worth taking seriously for even the
enthusiast?
Happy Snappin'
NB

In article , Ron Zeis
wrote:

I don't think that there will be any discernable differences in speed
between the two.

I'm sorry to disagree, but there have been many speed comparisons done
betwen Compact Flash, and xD cards in Olympus Cameras. A fast Compact
flash card will almost cut the write speed in half, at a fraction of
the price of xD.
Just pick up th minimun xD card you would want for panoramas, and
emergency backup, and get a good high speed Compact Flash card for the
other slot.
xD is a "dumb" medium, similar to "Smart" media. Compact Flash
includes circuitry within the card to speed things up.
http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/c5050/c5050-card.html , among others.
Believe me, I have done a lot of research in this area, as I love
Olympus cameras, but have very little respect for their choice of
Memory. Ask yourself why they would even include a compact flash slot
in their cameras if xD was worth taking seriously for even the
enthusiast?
Happy Snappin'
NB

nellybly wrote:
I don't think that there will be any discernable differences in speed
between the two.

I'm sorry to disagree, but there have been many speed comparisons done
betwen Compact Flash, and xD cards in Olympus Cameras.

But not in the Oly 8080. Each camera has different write speeds...

A fast Compact
flash card will almost cut the write speed in half, at a fraction of
the price of xD.
Just pick up th minimun xD card you would want for panoramas, and
emergency backup, and get a good high speed Compact Flash card for the
other slot.
xD is a "dumb" medium, similar to "Smart" media. Compact Flash
includes circuitry within the card to speed things up.
http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/c5050/c5050-card.html , among others.

The 5050 is a completely different animal.

Believe me, I have done a lot of research in this area,

But it's quite obvious that you have no data for the 8080. The 0.9 MB/s
max write speed I quoted is based on actual measurements performed with
the Olympus 8080.

The 8080 writes at a maximum of 0.9MB/s to CF cards and a little bit
less to xD cards. Since CF cards are cheaper, the only reason to use xD
is to use the inbuilt panorama function.

Actually, when xD cards were launched, they were announced with write
speeds of 3-5MB/s. In practice however the Olympus cameras I've seen
(5050, 5060 and 8080) limit the write speed to less than 0.9MB/s - a bit
hard to understand, since Olympus is trying to promote the card
standard.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/
Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html

In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:


But it's quite obvious that you have no data for the 8080. The 0.9 MB/s
max write speed I quoted is based on actual measurements performed with
the Olympus 8080.

Thanks for the clarification. It's nice to know that the performance
of xD is being improved with the new camera.
NB

NB,

I really have to sound off in favor of CF over XD both for the 8080 and
general use.

CF's CPM (cost per megabyte) is substantially lower than XD, and the card
capacity is substantially larger, for which you will develop an IMMEDIATE
appreciation if you decide to use RAW or TIFF modes or capture any sort of
video.

Despite CF+ having transfer capacity, the bottleneck in regard to the 8080
exists in the camera itself. As a result, there is virtually no performance
benefit to faster CF cards or using XD over CF.

Furthermore, CF is far more broadly compatible, whether using for digital
photography or general use. More devices support it, including new camera
models, most of which seem to favor CF support. I developed a full
appreciation for this with my drawer full of unused SM and SD modules.

The one feature lacking in the 8080 for CF over XD is support of the
camera's panorama feature. This is highly overrated and a huge misnomer, as
the feature requires PC software to complete. This is PURELY an attempt by
Olympus to persuade customers to to buy Olympus memory products which, given
the price of the camera and the fact that no technical boundary otherwise
exists, is reprehensible. Furthermore, for $19.95, Camedia software will
stitch ANY images into panorama, and scores of other free or inexpensive
products will do the same. For $19.95, you can elimiante any advantage of XD
in terms of the 8080, and as CF is a much better price and performance
value, the answer for me was a VERY easy one.

I hope this helps.

E.

"nellybly" wrote in message
...
In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:


But it's quite obvious that you have no data for the 8080. The 0.9 MB/s
max write speed I quoted is based on actual measurements performed with
the Olympus 8080.

Thanks for the clarification. It's nice to know that the performance
of xD is being improved with the new camera.
NB

Elan Remford wrote:
NB,

I really have to sound off in favor of CF over XD both for the 8080 and
general use.

CF's CPM (cost per megabyte) is substantially lower than XD, and the card
capacity is substantially larger, for which you will develop an IMMEDIATE
appreciation if you decide to use RAW or TIFF modes or capture any sort of
video.

Despite CF+ having transfer capacity, the bottleneck in regard to the 8080
exists in the camera itself. As a result, there is virtually no performance
benefit to faster CF cards or using XD over CF.

Furthermore, CF is far more broadly compatible, whether using for digital
photography or general use. More devices support it, including new camera
models, most of which seem to favor CF support. I developed a full
appreciation for this with my drawer full of unused SM and SD modules.

The one feature lacking in the 8080 for CF over XD is support of the
camera's panorama feature. This is highly overrated and a huge misnomer, as
the feature requires PC software to complete. This is PURELY an attempt by
Olympus to persuade customers to to buy Olympus memory products which, given
the price of the camera and the fact that no technical boundary otherwise
exists, is reprehensible. Furthermore, for $19.95, Camedia software will
stitch ANY images into panorama, and scores of other free or inexpensive
products will do the same. For $19.95, you can elimiante any advantage of XD
in terms of the 8080, and as CF is a much better price and performance
value, the answer for me was a VERY easy one.

A couple of years ago when the CF vs. SM "wars" were taking place here I
was on the side of those who defended SM.

Well now I'm about to order an 8080, and guess what memory card I've
already ordered ? A 1GB CF (Transcend 45x, capable of over 6MB/s on
paper).

The reasons simply a
- cost. CF cards are cheaper.
- speed. Even in the 8080 with its card 0.9MB/s speed bottleneck CF
cards are slightly faster, but I also have an Olympus 5050 where CF
cards are twice as fast as SM and xD cards.
- compatibility. This is a minor issue, but the notebook I use has a CF
slot and the Vosonic Xs II card storage device has slots for all card
types except xD. It's minor issue, because I might buy an xD-CF adapter.

Nothing against xD cards, but at the moment CF cards are cheaper and
faster.

The 1GB card will allow me to store about 83 RAW files. Its 6MB/s
transfer rate is wasted in a camera like the 8080, but high speed cards
are only slightly more expensive (I'm paying only 20 Euro more), and I
might use the card in the 5050 (2.5MB/s card write speed). Also I might
upgrade to a DSLR in half a year or so and use the CF card there.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/
Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html