1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)

Started Sep 1, 2000 | Discussions
MattTheHat©
Contributing MemberPosts: 510
Like?
1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
Sep 1, 2000

Howdy Folks,

I just picked up one of the new 1 GB MicroDrives today and thought I would test the write times between it and my 340 MB MicroDrive as well as my 160 MB Lexar 8x Compact Flash card. I charter my results, which you should be able to see below. All times are in seconds. The tests were run with my D1 in continuous shooting mode, using manual focus, with the lens cap on (so there should be no differences in JPEG processing times) at 1/500. Each card was formatted immediately before each run. The times shown were started immediately after the camera fired the last shot, so they don't include the time required to take the 10 or 21 shots.

Interestingly, the 1 GB MicroDrive significantly outperformed the 340 MB MicroDrive in the NEF mode (HI RAW in the chart). This was the only place where the 1 GB model outperformed the 340 MB model, so I double checked it several times, with the same results every single time! Perhaps IBM has optimized the sector size or buffer size (or interleaving or other some such magic) with Nikon D1 RAW transfer in mind? Sneaky devils!

I hope some of y'all will find this un-scientific test useful.

-- hide signature --

-MattTheHat

Uwe Steinmueller
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,389
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to MattTheHat©, Sep 1, 2000

What about heat with 1GB drive?

Uwe

MattTheHat wrote:

Howdy Folks,

I just picked up one of the new 1 GB MicroDrives today and thought I
would test the write times between it and my 340 MB MicroDrive as well
as my 160 MB Lexar 8x Compact Flash card. I charter my results, which
you should be able to see below. All times are in seconds. The tests
were run with my D1 in continuous shooting mode, using manual focus,
with the lens cap on (so there should be no differences in JPEG
processing times) at 1/500. Each card was formatted immediately before
each run. The times shown were started immediately after the camera
fired the last shot, so they don't include the time required to take the
10 or 21 shots.

Interestingly, the 1 GB MicroDrive significantly outperformed the 340 MB
MicroDrive in the NEF mode (HI RAW in the chart). This was the only
place where the 1 GB model outperformed the 340 MB model, so I double
checked it several times, with the same results every single time!
Perhaps IBM has optimized the sector size or buffer size (or
interleaving or other some such magic) with Nikon D1 RAW transfer in
mind? Sneaky devils!

I hope some of y'all will find this un-scientific test useful.

-- hide signature --

-MattTheHat

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Stan Disbrow
Senior MemberPosts: 2,935
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to Uwe Steinmueller, Sep 1, 2000

Matt,

Nice job. I haven't picked one up - yet.

Uwe,

The 1GB MD has a lower current demand (from IBM spec sheets) than the 340MB one does. That will automatically mean less heat generation. Part of this is refinement of the drive controller in the MD and part of this is the closer track spacing a 1GB has over a 340MB. The heads don't need as much current to move a shorter throw.

I've not understood the MD heat issue. All three of my MD's run cooler than either my SanDisk or Lexar flash cards. I can only surmise that there were variations in some MD's, perhaps earlier ones. I can recall such variations in larger drives in the past, so it wouldn't surprise me one bit.....

Stan

Uwe Steinmueller wrote:

What about heat with 1GB drive?

Uwe

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Richard Parkinson
Regular MemberPosts: 345
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to MattTheHat©, Sep 2, 2000

Many thanks for the info Mat.

I would guess that the 1GB microdrive has a faster write speed, due to the higher recording density, but also higher seek time (possibly due to the lower power consumption?). This would explain the slower times for smaller files and faster ones for larger files as when you create a file you have to seek to the file directory to write an entry and then seek to the start of the file and write it, so with bigger files the seek/data size ratio is larger.

If this is true then it is possible that it may become very slow if it is not formated regularly to prevent fragmentaion.

MattTheHat wrote:

Howdy Folks,

I just picked up one of the new 1 GB MicroDrives today and thought I
would test the write times between it and my 340 MB MicroDrive as well
as my 160 MB Lexar 8x Compact Flash card. I charter my results, which
you should be able to see below. All times are in seconds. The tests
were run with my D1 in continuous shooting mode, using manual focus,
with the lens cap on (so there should be no differences in JPEG
processing times) at 1/500. Each card was formatted immediately before
each run. The times shown were started immediately after the camera
fired the last shot, so they don't include the time required to take the
10 or 21 shots.

Interestingly, the 1 GB MicroDrive significantly outperformed the 340 MB
MicroDrive in the NEF mode (HI RAW in the chart). This was the only
place where the 1 GB model outperformed the 340 MB model, so I double
checked it several times, with the same results every single time!
Perhaps IBM has optimized the sector size or buffer size (or
interleaving or other some such magic) with Nikon D1 RAW transfer in
mind? Sneaky devils!

I hope some of y'all will find this un-scientific test useful.

-- hide signature --

-MattTheHat

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MattTheHat©
Contributing MemberPosts: 510
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to Stan Disbrow, Sep 5, 2000

Hey guys,

I haven't shot with the 1 GB MicroDrive enough to commment ont the heat, but
Stan is spot-on about the current consumption vs heat issue (even if he's not a
professional photographer ;-> ). My 340 MB MicroDrive DOES get hot, perhaps it's
an earlier model, but I did not notice excessive heat from my test runs. If it's

important, I'll run themm again and try to guesstimate the heat level of the drives.

-- hide signature --

-MattTheHat (rank amateur)

Stan Disbrow wrote:
Matt,

Nice job. I haven't picked one up - yet.

Uwe,

The 1GB MD has a lower current demand (from IBM spec sheets) than the
340MB one does. That will automatically mean less heat generation. Part
of this is refinement of the drive controller in the MD and part of this
is the closer track spacing a 1GB has over a 340MB. The heads don't need
as much current to move a shorter throw.

I've not understood the MD heat issue. All three of my MD's run cooler
than either my SanDisk or Lexar flash cards. I can only surmise that
there were variations in some MD's, perhaps earlier ones. I can recall
such variations in larger drives in the past, so it wouldn't surprise me
one bit.....

Stan

Uwe Steinmueller wrote:

What about heat with 1GB drive?

Uwe

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Glenn
New MemberPosts: 2
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to MattTheHat©, Sep 5, 2000

Hey Guys,

Where did you buy your 1gb Microdrives from?

I'm stuck in the UK where stocks are non-existent and they will charge about 40% more (which sucks).

Looking forward to using one in my canon and my ipaq...

Glenn

MattTheHat wrote:
Hey guys,

I haven't shot with the 1 GB MicroDrive enough to commment ont the heat,
but
Stan is spot-on about the current consumption vs heat issue (even if
he's not a
professional photographer ;-> ). My 340 MB MicroDrive DOES get hot,
perhaps it's
an earlier model, but I did not notice excessive heat from my test runs.
If it's
important, I'll run themm again and try to guesstimate the heat level of
the drives.

-- hide signature --

-MattTheHat (rank amateur)

Stan Disbrow wrote:
Matt,

Nice job. I haven't picked one up - yet.

Uwe,

The 1GB MD has a lower current demand (from IBM spec sheets) than the
340MB one does. That will automatically mean less heat generation. Part
of this is refinement of the drive controller in the MD and part of this
is the closer track spacing a 1GB has over a 340MB. The heads don't need
as much current to move a shorter throw.

I've not understood the MD heat issue. All three of my MD's run cooler
than either my SanDisk or Lexar flash cards. I can only surmise that
there were variations in some MD's, perhaps earlier ones. I can recall
such variations in larger drives in the past, so it wouldn't surprise me
one bit.....

Stan

Uwe Steinmueller wrote:

What about heat with 1GB drive?

Uwe

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mike Kelley
Senior MemberPosts: 1,445
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to MattTheHat©, Sep 5, 2000

Of course, the real issue is not whether the 1gig drive is faster than the 340 but whether it is fast enough . Depending upon camera used, you may very well not be able to shoot faster than the drive can store images, or the drive lag may be well within acceptable tolerances.

I'd be more curious of your (and others') non-scientific impressions of how the drive performs in the camera. That is, do you feel that you're spending too much time waiting for it to write? I'm planning on using such a drive in the Canon D30, so if it doesn't seem fast enough for the D1 that may or may not be indicative of how happy I'd be with the performance, but it would still be interesting to read people's opinions.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MattTheHat©
Contributing MemberPosts: 510
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to Glenn, Sep 5, 2000

Hello Glenn,

I got mine from Imaging Spectrum here in Dallas
http://www.imagingspectrum.com > . I'm not sure if they export or not. Good luck.

-- hide signature --

-MattTheHat

UPSGlenn wrote:
Hey Guys,

Where did you buy your 1gb Microdrives from?

I'm stuck in the UK where stocks are non-existent and they will charge
about 40% more (which sucks).

Looking forward to using one in my canon and my ipaq...

Glenn

MattTheHat wrote:
Hey guys,

I haven't shot with the 1 GB MicroDrive enough to commment ont the heat,
but
Stan is spot-on about the current consumption vs heat issue (even if
he's not a
professional photographer ;-> ). My 340 MB MicroDrive DOES get hot,
perhaps it's
an earlier model, but I did not notice excessive heat from my test runs.
If it's
important, I'll run themm again and try to guesstimate the heat level of
the drives.

-- hide signature --

-MattTheHat (rank amateur)

Stan Disbrow wrote:
Matt,

Nice job. I haven't picked one up - yet.

Uwe,

The 1GB MD has a lower current demand (from IBM spec sheets) than the
340MB one does. That will automatically mean less heat generation. Part
of this is refinement of the drive controller in the MD and part of this
is the closer track spacing a 1GB has over a 340MB. The heads don't need
as much current to move a shorter throw.

I've not understood the MD heat issue. All three of my MD's run cooler
than either my SanDisk or Lexar flash cards. I can only surmise that
there were variations in some MD's, perhaps earlier ones. I can recall
such variations in larger drives in the past, so it wouldn't surprise me
one bit.....

Stan

Uwe Steinmueller wrote:

What about heat with 1GB drive?

Uwe

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bernard Carns
Contributing MemberPosts: 959
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to MattTheHat©, Sep 5, 2000

The times are in seconds, eh (sentence 3).

It takes over 6 minutes to write 21 fine images and over 2 minutes to write 10 raw images to a D1?

My 330 writes 10 raw images to my 340 microdrive in 34 seconds.

In 6 minutes I could write a lot more than 21 raw images and the die on my 330 is 10% larger than the D1.

Hmm.

BC

MattTheHat wrote:

Howdy Folks,

I just picked up one of the new 1 GB MicroDrives today and thought I
would test the write times between it and my 340 MB MicroDrive as well
as my 160 MB Lexar 8x Compact Flash card. I charter my results, which
you should be able to see below. All times are in seconds. The tests
were run with my D1 in continuous shooting mode, using manual focus,
with the lens cap on (so there should be no differences in JPEG
processing times) at 1/500. Each card was formatted immediately before
each run. The times shown were started immediately after the camera
fired the last shot, so they don't include the time required to take the
10 or 21 shots.

Interestingly, the 1 GB MicroDrive significantly outperformed the 340 MB
MicroDrive in the NEF mode (HI RAW in the chart). This was the only
place where the 1 GB model outperformed the 340 MB model, so I double
checked it several times, with the same results every single time!
Perhaps IBM has optimized the sector size or buffer size (or
interleaving or other some such magic) with Nikon D1 RAW transfer in
mind? Sneaky devils!

I hope some of y'all will find this un-scientific test useful.

-- hide signature --

-MattTheHat

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jay Kelbley
Contributing MemberPosts: 574Gear list
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to Bernard Carns, Sep 5, 2000

Bernard Carns wrote:

My 330 writes 10 raw images to my 340 microdrive in 34 seconds.

BTW..

The 1 GB Microdrives have been tested in and are fully compatible with the current Kodak DCS cameras.

They are an especially good match for cameras that store larger files like the DCS 330, DCS 560, and DCS660...

-Jay Kelbley
Eastman Kodak Company
jay.kelbley@kodak.com

 Jay Kelbley's gear list:Jay Kelbley's gear list
Samsung Galaxy Camera (Wi-Fi) Samsung NX20 Samsung NX300 Samsung Galaxy NX Samsung NX30 +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Richard Parkinson
Regular MemberPosts: 345
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to Glenn, Sep 6, 2000

Glenn,

Let me know if you find anything, I'm in the same boat!

Glenn wrote:
Hey Guys,

Where did you buy your 1gb Microdrives from?

I'm stuck in the UK where stocks are non-existent and they will charge
about 40% more (which sucks).

Looking forward to using one in my canon and my ipaq...

Glenn

MattTheHat wrote:
Hey guys,

I haven't shot with the 1 GB MicroDrive enough to commment ont the heat,
but
Stan is spot-on about the current consumption vs heat issue (even if
he's not a
professional photographer ;-> ). My 340 MB MicroDrive DOES get hot,
perhaps it's
an earlier model, but I did not notice excessive heat from my test runs.
If it's
important, I'll run themm again and try to guesstimate the heat level of
the drives.

-- hide signature --

-MattTheHat (rank amateur)

Stan Disbrow wrote:
Matt,

Nice job. I haven't picked one up - yet.

Uwe,

The 1GB MD has a lower current demand (from IBM spec sheets) than the
340MB one does. That will automatically mean less heat generation. Part
of this is refinement of the drive controller in the MD and part of this
is the closer track spacing a 1GB has over a 340MB. The heads don't need
as much current to move a shorter throw.

I've not understood the MD heat issue. All three of my MD's run cooler
than either my SanDisk or Lexar flash cards. I can only surmise that
there were variations in some MD's, perhaps earlier ones. I can recall
such variations in larger drives in the past, so it wouldn't surprise me
one bit.....

Stan

Uwe Steinmueller wrote:

What about heat with 1GB drive?

Uwe

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Stan Disbrow
Senior MemberPosts: 2,935
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to Mike Kelley, Sep 6, 2000

Mike,

I have the 340's. Haven't picked up a 1GB - yet. I find that I wait too long for NEF files to write, but that the Fine JPG time is more than fast enough. I shoot a lot of fast-paced auto racing action, and the D1 keeps up with me as long as I stay in the JPG mode.

For less hectic shooting, the transfer speed using NEF files is OK as long as I'm making use of the 10-shot buffer RAM.

Stan

Mike Kelley wrote:

Of course, the real issue is not whether the 1gig drive is faster than
the 340 but whether it is fast enough . Depending upon camera used,
you may very well not be able to shoot faster than the drive can store
images, or the drive lag may be well within acceptable tolerances.

I'd be more curious of your (and others') non-scientific impressions of
how the drive performs in the camera. That is, do you feel that you're
spending too much time waiting for it to write? I'm planning on using
such a drive in the Canon D30, so if it doesn't seem fast enough for the
D1 that may or may not be indicative of how happy I'd be with the
performance, but it would still be interesting to read people's opinions.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Richard Parkinson
Regular MemberPosts: 345
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to Stan Disbrow, Sep 6, 2000

What I can't understand is why Nikon don't let you take advantage of the D1 memory buffer when you are in single shot mode. There are plenty of times when you don't want continuous shooting but do want to be able to shoot before the last shot has been saved, especially with NEF's and TIFFs (although I never use these).

Anyone know why this is the case?

Stan Disbrow wrote:
Mike,

I have the 340's. Haven't picked up a 1GB - yet. I find that I wait too
long for NEF files to write, but that the Fine JPG time is more than
fast enough. I shoot a lot of fast-paced auto racing action, and the D1
keeps up with me as long as I stay in the JPG mode.

For less hectic shooting, the transfer speed using NEF files is OK as
long as I'm making use of the 10-shot buffer RAM.

Stan

Mike Kelley wrote:

Of course, the real issue is not whether the 1gig drive is faster than
the 340 but whether it is fast enough . Depending upon camera used,
you may very well not be able to shoot faster than the drive can store
images, or the drive lag may be well within acceptable tolerances.

I'd be more curious of your (and others') non-scientific impressions of
how the drive performs in the camera. That is, do you feel that you're
spending too much time waiting for it to write? I'm planning on using
such a drive in the Canon D30, so if it doesn't seem fast enough for the
D1 that may or may not be indicative of how happy I'd be with the
performance, but it would still be interesting to read people's opinions.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sam Leinhardt
New MemberPosts: 1
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to MattTheHat©, Sep 10, 2000

Interesting results especially when contrasted with IBM's published sustained write speed of 2.6-4.2 MB/s for their microdrives compared with 1.2-1.5 MB/s for Lexar's 8X and 10X CFs respectively. Matt's results seem counterintuitive.

MattTheHat wrote:

Howdy Folks,

I just picked up one of the new 1 GB MicroDrives today and thought I
would test the write times between it and my 340 MB MicroDrive as well
as my 160 MB Lexar 8x Compact Flash card. I charter my results, which
you should be able to see below. All times are in seconds. The tests
were run with my D1 in continuous shooting mode, using manual focus,
with the lens cap on (so there should be no differences in JPEG
processing times) at 1/500. Each card was formatted immediately before
each run. The times shown were started immediately after the camera
fired the last shot, so they don't include the time required to take the
10 or 21 shots.

Interestingly, the 1 GB MicroDrive significantly outperformed the 340 MB
MicroDrive in the NEF mode (HI RAW in the chart). This was the only
place where the 1 GB model outperformed the 340 MB model, so I double
checked it several times, with the same results every single time!
Perhaps IBM has optimized the sector size or buffer size (or
interleaving or other some such magic) with Nikon D1 RAW transfer in
mind? Sneaky devils!

I hope some of y'all will find this un-scientific test useful.

-- hide signature --

-MattTheHat

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Stephen Erf
Forum MemberPosts: 50
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to Glenn, Sep 13, 2000

Glenn wrote:

Hey Guys,

Where did you buy your 1gb Microdrives from?

Helix in Chicago had them as of Friday last.

Steve

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Glenn
New MemberPosts: 1
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to MattTheHat©, Sep 18, 2000

Ended up reading another thread where you could order them from Roberts Imaging.

http://www.robertsimaging.com

Can't find the drive on the web but if you call and ask for Jody he will organize everything for you. Just need to send a money order to the states. That clears in about 5 days and then they FedEx it and you hope customs doesn't inspect it

Notified today that it's shipped so will let you UK folk know how the customs handle it and how much more I may have to pay.

Glenn

MattTheHat wrote:
Hello Glenn,

I got mine from Imaging Spectrum here in Dallas
http://www.imagingspectrum.com > . I'm not sure if they export or not.
Good luck.

-- hide signature --

-MattTheHat

UPSGlenn wrote:
Hey Guys,

Where did you buy your 1gb Microdrives from?

I'm stuck in the UK where stocks are non-existent and they will charge
about 40% more (which sucks).

Looking forward to using one in my canon and my ipaq...

Glenn

MattTheHat wrote:
Hey guys,

I haven't shot with the 1 GB MicroDrive enough to commment ont the heat,
but
Stan is spot-on about the current consumption vs heat issue (even if
he's not a
professional photographer ;-> ). My 340 MB MicroDrive DOES get hot,
perhaps it's
an earlier model, but I did not notice excessive heat from my test runs.
If it's
important, I'll run themm again and try to guesstimate the heat level of
the drives.

-- hide signature --

-MattTheHat (rank amateur)

Stan Disbrow wrote:
Matt,

Nice job. I haven't picked one up - yet.

Uwe,

The 1GB MD has a lower current demand (from IBM spec sheets) than the
340MB one does. That will automatically mean less heat generation. Part
of this is refinement of the drive controller in the MD and part of this
is the closer track spacing a 1GB has over a 340MB. The heads don't need
as much current to move a shorter throw.

I've not understood the MD heat issue. All three of my MD's run cooler
than either my SanDisk or Lexar flash cards. I can only surmise that
there were variations in some MD's, perhaps earlier ones. I can recall
such variations in larger drives in the past, so it wouldn't surprise me
one bit.....

Stan

Uwe Steinmueller wrote:

What about heat with 1GB drive?

Uwe

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Whao
New MemberPosts: 17
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to MattTheHat©, Sep 28, 2000

How do you feel about the power consumption between the 340MB and 1GB drives? Is it noticiable?

Whao

MattTheHat wrote:

Howdy Folks,

I just picked up one of the new 1 GB MicroDrives today and thought I
would test the write times between it and my 340 MB MicroDrive as well
as my 160 MB Lexar 8x Compact Flash card. I charter my results, which
you should be able to see below. All times are in seconds. The tests
were run with my D1 in continuous shooting mode, using manual focus,
with the lens cap on (so there should be no differences in JPEG
processing times) at 1/500. Each card was formatted immediately before
each run. The times shown were started immediately after the camera
fired the last shot, so they don't include the time required to take the
10 or 21 shots.

Interestingly, the 1 GB MicroDrive significantly outperformed the 340 MB
MicroDrive in the NEF mode (HI RAW in the chart). This was the only
place where the 1 GB model outperformed the 340 MB model, so I double
checked it several times, with the same results every single time!
Perhaps IBM has optimized the sector size or buffer size (or
interleaving or other some such magic) with Nikon D1 RAW transfer in
mind? Sneaky devils!

I hope some of y'all will find this un-scientific test useful.

-- hide signature --

-MattTheHat

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
robert i reis
Regular MemberPosts: 119
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to Stan Disbrow, Sep 28, 2000

Stan:

How do you set the D1 to use the 10 Shot Buffer Ram? I've currently set my D1 to Continuous, custom setting 25/1, cutom setting 26/1.

Thanks
Bob Reis
reis@buffalo.edu

Stan Disbrow wrote:
Mike,

I have the 340's. Haven't picked up a 1GB - yet. I find that I wait too
long for NEF files to write, but that the Fine JPG time is more than
fast enough. I shoot a lot of fast-paced auto racing action, and the D1
keeps up with me as long as I stay in the JPG mode.

For less hectic shooting, the transfer speed using NEF files is OK as
long as I'm making use of the 10-shot buffer RAM.

Stan

Mike Kelley wrote:

Of course, the real issue is not whether the 1gig drive is faster than
the 340 but whether it is fast enough . Depending upon camera used,
you may very well not be able to shoot faster than the drive can store
images, or the drive lag may be well within acceptable tolerances.

I'd be more curious of your (and others') non-scientific impressions of
how the drive performs in the camera. That is, do you feel that you're
spending too much time waiting for it to write? I'm planning on using
such a drive in the Canon D30, so if it doesn't seem fast enough for the
D1 that may or may not be indicative of how happy I'd be with the
performance, but it would still be interesting to read people's opinions.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MattTheHat©
Contributing MemberPosts: 510
Like?
Re: 1 GB MicroDrive Write Time Comparison (D1)
In reply to robert i reis, Sep 28, 2000

If you shoot in JPEG mode, you get a maximm of 21 shots in continuos mode. If
you shoot in RAW or any of the TIFF modes, you get 10. You choose your frame
rate for continuous mode in Custom Menu #25, and the maximum number of
shots (up to 21 or 10) in Custom Menu #26.

-- hide signature --

-MattTheHat

10 Shot Buffer Ram - How to? wrote:
Stan:

How do you set the D1 to use the 10 Shot Buffer Ram? I've currently set
my D1 to Continuous, custom setting 25/1, cutom setting 26/1.

Thanks
Bob Reis
reis@buffalo.edu

Stan Disbrow wrote:
Mike,

I have the 340's. Haven't picked up a 1GB - yet. I find that I wait too
long for NEF files to write, but that the Fine JPG time is more than
fast enough. I shoot a lot of fast-paced auto racing action, and the D1
keeps up with me as long as I stay in the JPG mode.

For less hectic shooting, the transfer speed using NEF files is OK as
long as I'm making use of the 10-shot buffer RAM.

Stan

Mike Kelley wrote:

Of course, the real issue is not whether the 1gig drive is faster than
the 340 but whether it is fast enough . Depending upon camera used,
you may very well not be able to shoot faster than the drive can store
images, or the drive lag may be well within acceptable tolerances.

I'd be more curious of your (and others') non-scientific impressions of
how the drive performs in the camera. That is, do you feel that you're
spending too much time waiting for it to write? I'm planning on using
such a drive in the Canon D30, so if it doesn't seem fast enough for the
D1 that may or may not be indicative of how happy I'd be with the
performance, but it would still be interesting to read people's opinions.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads