Microdrives are just no good for cameras

[Steve Strawn]

I know a lot of people here use microdrives and have never had a problem with them. But a lot of people do. Mine failed and I had to explain to the client why I had nothing from a shoot. I resolved to only use compact flash from here on in.

My question is this, do microdrives even make sense for cameras any more? They are fragile devices, and cameras tend to take a lot of abuse that a microdrive just isn't designed to take.

Seeing as you can get a 512mb compact flash card for under $200 USD, why would anyone want a microdrive, seeing as they can and do fail often in cameras? I don't.

Steve

http://www.splut.net

 

[EricF]

I agree with you on this. It's kind of insurance issue you need to worry about it you do this for serious.

BTW, can you tell me where I can get 512MB chips for under $200? The cheapest I can find now is $320 not incuding shipping.

Thanks!

I know a lot of people here use microdrives and have never had a
problem with them. But a lot of people do. Mine failed and I had to
explain to the client why I had nothing from a shoot. I resolved to
only use compact flash from here on in.

My question is this, do microdrives even make sense for cameras any
more? They are fragile devices, and cameras tend to take a lot of
abuse that a microdrive just isn't designed to take.

Seeing as you can get a 512mb compact flash card for under $200
USD, why would anyone want a microdrive, seeing as they can and do
fail often in cameras? I don't.

Steve

http://www.splut.net

 

[Steve Strawn]

http://www.digi4me.com

It's generic, but it works.

BTW, can you tell me where I can get 512MB chips for under $200?
The cheapest I can find now is $320 not incuding shipping.

Thanks!

I know a lot of people here use microdrives and have never had a
problem with them. But a lot of people do. Mine failed and I had to
explain to the client why I had nothing from a shoot. I resolved to
only use compact flash from here on in.

My question is this, do microdrives even make sense for cameras any
more? They are fragile devices, and cameras tend to take a lot of
abuse that a microdrive just isn't designed to take.

Seeing as you can get a 512mb compact flash card for under $200
USD, why would anyone want a microdrive, seeing as they can and do
fail often in cameras? I don't.

Steve

http://www.splut.net

 

[Frank Miller]

Seeing as you can get a 512mb compact flash card for under $200
USD, why would anyone want a microdrive, seeing as they can and do
fail often in cameras? I don't.

Don't fool yourself. Failure is not limited to microdrives. I've seen CF's fail as well. I'm sorry your microdrive failed, but I don't think it's fair to single them out.

What is probably true is that when doing an important shoot, don't rely on any single storage device. Rather than get 500MB CF's, get several 128MB. Then, when one fails, you've only lost a section of your shoot.

--RZ http://www.romeozulu.com/photos

 

[EricF]

Have you done your "beat-up" test on this chip yet? Just a curious concern when seeing no brand and a picture with "64MB" on it ...

Thanks!

http://www.digi4me.com

It's generic, but it works.

 

[Steve Strawn]

Don't fool yourself. Failure is not limited to microdrives. I've
seen CF's fail as well. I'm sorry your microdrive failed, but I
don't think it's fair to single them out.

True, I should have said microdrives are far more prone to failure. All else being equal, solid state beats mechanical any day.

 

[DavidP #28649]

If I were a pro shooting for clients, I'd have multiple microdrives and/or compact flash cards. Both can fail, and I'd hate to be without an extra.

I'm still having great luck with my 1 GB microdrive. And it's so much cheaper per megabyte than the flash cards (though the gap is narrowing).

With 6 megapixels staring us in the face, we need more storage, and NOW !

A 256 MB card will only hold 40 shots or so of 6 Megapixel RAW images (at 800 IS).

Yikes, that means even a 1 GB microdrive will only hold about 160 shots.

I know a lot of people here use microdrives and have never had a
problem with them. But a lot of people do. Mine failed and I had to
explain to the client why I had nothing from a shoot. I resolved to
only use compact flash from here on in.

My question is this, do microdrives even make sense for cameras any
more? They are fragile devices, and cameras tend to take a lot of
abuse that a microdrive just isn't designed to take.

Seeing as you can get a 512mb compact flash card for under $200
USD, why would anyone want a microdrive, seeing as they can and do
fail often in cameras? I don't.

--The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net

 

[Steve Strawn]

Yeah, kind of how I felt. Only been through about 1000 shots, but a lot were outside in sub-freezing temperatures, and so far so good.

Thanks!

http://www.digi4me.com

It's generic, but it works.

 

[EricF]

Electronic devices do fail, live with it. The issue is really how much of it you can tolerate and how to distribute your risks besides improving the technology.

Ultimately in my vision ... when all wireless technologies (satelitte, microwave, infrared ....) become easily available for every consumer, the camera manufactures will incorporate transmitters in cameras so that images will be uploaded to secure data banks as they are captured anywhere. When is that gonna happen

I'm still having great luck with my 1 GB microdrive. And it's so
much cheaper per megabyte than the flash cards (though the gap is
narrowing).

With 6 megapixels staring us in the face, we need more storage, and
NOW !

A 256 MB card will only hold 40 shots or so of 6 Megapixel RAW
images (at 800 IS).

Yikes, that means even a 1 GB microdrive will only hold about 160
shots.

I know a lot of people here use microdrives and have never had a
problem with them. But a lot of people do. Mine failed and I had to
explain to the client why I had nothing from a shoot. I resolved to
only use compact flash from here on in.

My question is this, do microdrives even make sense for cameras any
more? They are fragile devices, and cameras tend to take a lot of
abuse that a microdrive just isn't designed to take.

Seeing as you can get a 512mb compact flash card for under $200
USD, why would anyone want a microdrive, seeing as they can and do
fail often in cameras? I don't.

--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net

 

[Greg Gilman]

HI,

I bought two micro drives (1 GB) when I bought my D30. I have taken 16,000 images with no problems. I have read about others having problems, but they have been problem free for me. I use a Micro Tech USB connector, ACDSee and occasional PS all with no known problems related to the micro drives.

Greg

 

[VincentJ]

IMHO microdrives aren't made for cameras at all, unless you're going to coddle and baby them. Most pros I know abuse, or really push their film cameras, and it is a little too much to expect a spinning platter with a head to withstand that. Of course, if you pay $$$$$$$, you might be able to get some military strength drives tested upto 30-Gees or something like that

My office room-mate got his D30 last month with the 1gig microdrive. It went kaput last week after a slight bump.

My question is this, do microdrives even make sense for cameras any
more? They are fragile devices, and cameras tend to take a lot of
abuse that a microdrive just isn't designed to take.

 

[Peter Lindsey50614]

This is a good analysis. Many 'prosumers' take extreme care with their expensive toy. I've even heard of people who refused to put velcro on the 550ex flash because it's a "$500 unit and I don't want it all messed up".

For these people I would expect the microdrive to be just fine. (including me, most of the time)

Pros use the gear for what it was made, to the limits, taking just enough care not to break it when they most need it. The extra money made in pushing it to its limits more than pays for a replacement if it breaks once per year. Who cares about marks and scuffs from everyday use. For these people a microdrive is definitely a bad idea.

Good point about pros using multiple smaller cards, too. If I were a pro having to shoot a whole 1G in one critical shoot, I'd do the same.

My office room-mate got his D30 last month with the 1gig
microdrive. It went kaput last week after a slight bump.

My question is this, do microdrives even make sense for cameras any
more? They are fragile devices, and cameras tend to take a lot of
abuse that a microdrive just isn't designed to take.

 

[phil wigglesworth]

I think that flash may be a better option for most right now, but I disagree with a couple of the reasons posted here.

IMHO microdrives aren't made for cameras at all, [...]

This would seem to be false. Check the specifications:
http://www.ibm.com/microdrive

In the banner: "High Performance storage for portable electronics". Under "solutions", "digital photography" is the first application listed.

[paraphrase] "microdrives are ok for consumers but they're not up to the abuse real professionals can give gear"

I don't molly-coddle my gear, so mine's been up a bunch of mountains, been changed in the rain, dragged across deserts, all that stuff. Most of the switchgear labels on my camera are no longer readable (although the LCD is still perfect). I've taken long snowboard falls whilst carrying the camera & drive. No problems with it so far. I do have backups. Ok, that's a sample size of one, but you'd hear more here about these things breaking if the failure rate was high.

I'm also a "professional" in the software business, and my computers take a similar amount of abuse. I do back up my hard drives, and I don't carry my machines around in little padded cases. They get rained on too. For what it's worth, the disks don't fail on me, but the keyboards do.

I don't have the data on failure rates for other types of storage, but flash cards aren't going to be immune.

My question is this, do microdrives even make sense for cameras any
more? They are fragile devices, and cameras tend to take a lot of
abuse that a microdrive just isn't designed to take.

Robustness: as above, that's not an issue for me. I don't think that the MD is any more sensitive than (for example) my SLR mirror or my L lens mechanism. I don't rely on zero failures of any of those (been bitten once by lens failure).

It depends what you're after, and what you shoot. The main plus with the microdrive is that it's the biggest thing around. The main hassle is that because it's so big you'll lose a lot if it does fail. A secondary pain is the start-up lag, which is longer than with flash.

I think that with larger flash cards appearing, the MD's losing it's cost/ storage space advantage. They'll need to bring out a 10G drive soon.

http://www.wigglesworld.btinternet.co.uk/snow/thumbnails/IMG_11682.jpg--Philhttp://www.wigglesworld.btinternet.co.uk/

 

[Walt60320]

Peter has an excellent point. I take extreme care of my D30 and lenses almost to the point of being obsessed about it. Then you take my friend who owns a beautiful Canon Elan 7e and some really nice lenses. The other day I saw his camera in the trunk of his car. This was not a clean empty carpeted trunk like in my BMW. It was dirty with rust and lots of loose things floating around like a rusty bumper jack and lug wrench. There wasn't even a lens cap on his lens. My friend would be the first one to come on this forum and complain that the CF card door broke off or the pop up flash has a crack in it, or the Microdrive crashed, etc., etc. but not mention under what conditions these things happened.

I can probably go 10 years without a failure with my equipment. He's lucky if he goes 10 days.

Sorry to ramble on but I think I made my point.

Walt

This is a good analysis. Many 'prosumers' take extreme care with
their expensive toy. I've even heard of people who refused to put
velcro on the 550ex flash because it's a "$500 unit and I don't
want it all messed up".

For these people I would expect the microdrive to be just fine.
(including me, most of the time)

Pros use the gear for what it was made, to the limits, taking just
enough care not to break it when they most need it. The extra
money made in pushing it to its limits more than pays for a
replacement if it breaks once per year. Who cares about marks and
scuffs from everyday use. For these people a microdrive is
definitely a bad idea.

Good point about pros using multiple smaller cards, too. If I were
a pro having to shoot a whole 1G in one critical shoot, I'd do the
same.

 

[Scott Bourne]

I've recorded 6000 images on my 1-gig Microdrive in two months without a failure.

On the other hand, last year, I bought a brand new Canon EOS 1-V body for around $2100.00. I had it three months and it crashed. It simply would not work. One minute it was fine and the next it was not. Using the logic of many who post to this board, I could then say that the EOS 1V is no good; mine failed.

The bottom line is that ANYTHING man-made or mechanical WILL eventually fail. Engineers know this and test for it. It even has a name. It is called MTBF. (Mean Time Between Failure.) Airplane bolts fail. Gun triggers fail. Cars (particularly mine fail. It is part of life.

Unless there is a great deal of evidence to suggest that a certain product fails substantially more often than its competition, then there is no reason to fear it.

I personally think a great deal of the hysteria that surrounds the microdrive issue has to do with the IBM 340 which DID have an unusually high rate of failure. The 1-gig drives have an MTBF of 9000 uses which is only slightly less than most CF cards.

I am truly sorry that your card failed. For you, the rate was unacceptable and I am not trying to dimish that. I just don't see the point of damning an entire product line because of an isolated incident.

That's my two cents.

Scott Bourne
http://www.scottbourne.com

I know a lot of people here use microdrives and have never had a
problem with them. But a lot of people do. Mine failed and I had to
explain to the client why I had nothing from a shoot. I resolved to
only use compact flash from here on in.

My question is this, do microdrives even make sense for cameras any
more? They are fragile devices, and cameras tend to take a lot of
abuse that a microdrive just isn't designed to take.

Seeing as you can get a 512mb compact flash card for under $200
USD, why would anyone want a microdrive, seeing as they can and do
fail often in cameras? I don't.

Steve

http://www.splut.net

 

[JohnM31499]

The bottom line is that ANYTHING man-made or mechanical WILL
eventually fail. Engineers know this and test for it. It even has a
name. It is called MTBF. (Mean Time Between Failure.) Airplane
bolts fail. Gun triggers fail. Cars (particularly mine fail. It
is part of life.

It's just like computer hard drives. There are two types, those that have failed & those that are going to fail.

 

[John Rausch52041]

Yes, but ...

When the 1-V failed, you knew it and the exposed film in the camera was still good -- as well as any rolls you had taken earlier. This is not the case with a 1GB microdrive or a CF. They typically hold so much data that a failure is catastrophic. Common sense tells me to spread things around more. An added advantage is an out-of-warranty failure costs far less. I'm sure there is someone who has a good reason to have a huge microdrive or CF, but not most situations -- in miy opinion, of course.

John Rausch

On the other hand, last year, I bought a brand new Canon EOS 1-V
body for around $2100.00. I had it three months and it crashed. It
simply would not work. One minute it was fine and the next it was
not. Using the logic of many who post to this board, I could then
say that the EOS 1V is no good; mine failed.

The bottom line is that ANYTHING man-made or mechanical WILL
eventually fail. Engineers know this and test for it. It even has a
name. It is called MTBF. (Mean Time Between Failure.) Airplane
bolts fail. Gun triggers fail. Cars (particularly mine fail. It
is part of life.

Unless there is a great deal of evidence to suggest that a certain
product fails substantially more often than its competition, then
there is no reason to fear it.

I personally think a great deal of the hysteria that surrounds the
microdrive issue has to do with the IBM 340 which DID have an
unusually high rate of failure. The 1-gig drives have an MTBF of
9000 uses which is only slightly less than most CF cards.

I am truly sorry that your card failed. For you, the rate was
unacceptable and I am not trying to dimish that. I just don't see
the point of damning an entire product line because of an isolated
incident.

That's my two cents.

Scott Bourne
http://www.scottbourne.com

I know a lot of people here use microdrives and have never had a
problem with them. But a lot of people do. Mine failed and I had to
explain to the client why I had nothing from a shoot. I resolved to
only use compact flash from here on in.

My question is this, do microdrives even make sense for cameras any
more? They are fragile devices, and cameras tend to take a lot of
abuse that a microdrive just isn't designed to take.

Seeing as you can get a 512mb compact flash card for under $200
USD, why would anyone want a microdrive, seeing as they can and do
fail often in cameras? I don't.

Steve

http://www.splut.net

--John Rausch

 

[Jay Bean]

If you were using film instead of microdrive, would you trust the entire job to one large roll of film? Likely not. By the same token, for critical/important shoots, spread your shots across multiple devices. Even CF cards can fail.

I know a lot of people here use microdrives and have never had a
problem with them. But a lot of people do. Mine failed and I had to
explain to the client why I had nothing from a shoot. I resolved to
only use compact flash from here on in.

My question is this, do microdrives even make sense for cameras any
more? They are fragile devices, and cameras tend to take a lot of
abuse that a microdrive just isn't designed to take.

Seeing as you can get a 512mb compact flash card for under $200
USD, why would anyone want a microdrive, seeing as they can and do
fail often in cameras? I don't.

Steve

http://www.splut.net

 

[SteveB Ohio]

--
RZ
http://www.romeozulu.com/photos

Nice pictures there, RZ! Can you tell me what software you used to generate the galleries? Thanks.

Steve

 

[yali]

If you spead out, you reduced the possibility of losing all, but increased the possibility of losing a fraction of ALL. So, from the long run, it is the same!

I know a lot of people here use microdrives and have never had a
problem with them. But a lot of people do. Mine failed and I had to
explain to the client why I had nothing from a shoot. I resolved to
only use compact flash from here on in.

My question is this, do microdrives even make sense for cameras any
more? They are fragile devices, and cameras tend to take a lot of
abuse that a microdrive just isn't designed to take.

Seeing as you can get a 512mb compact flash card for under $200
USD, why would anyone want a microdrive, seeing as they can and do
fail often in cameras? I don't.

Steve

http://www.splut.net

--yali