SD vs CF again sort of

wlachan said:

I think CF makes sense as you can use 8GB and keep shooting. Most
devices support 2GB max through there are 4GB SD available. But for
the rest of consumers, I don't think the max size matter much. I
like SD as I don't have to worry bend pins, and SD allows the
camera being made smaller.

Click to expand...

I would've thought a pro would be better off with several fast cards and a portable backup device (for almost indefinitely continuous shooting). In which case, it doesn't really matter which way you go.

Problem with CF is that most other devices (PDAs, music players, etc) seem to have switched to SD, and more and more cameras look to be doing the same. Outside the high-end pro world, I expect CF to effectively die off before long.

-- Pete

No offense to Jeff the OP, but I don't think this poll will have any value for the upcoming K10D. Maybe the next generation of bodies. If Pentax is still deciding on whether to use CF or SD, I'd be scared to buy a K10D at the end of the year.

I mean if they haven't decided on CF or SD cards at this point, then what else haven't they decided? LCD size? Sensor? Layout? Battery type? Software? Right or left handed grip?

I certainly hope they aren't winging these decisions and throwing everything together last minute. Judging by the build quality & performance of my DS, I'd have to say these things have probably been decided with enough time to sort out any issues that might arise.

--
alinla



http://www.trappedlight.com
http://www.socal-dslr.com/forum.php
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LAShooters/

Greg Stark said:

Greg Stark said:

That said, the design for the 10Mpixel body is likely already cast
in stone and I doubt very strongly that it is anything other than
SD compatible.

Click to expand...

You're may be right about Petax using SD in the 10Mpixel body, but
I sure hope not. Now, on the other hand, if the new standard for
SD's successor is ratified by that time, and Pentax chooses to
support this new standard, I'd be all for it.

Click to expand...

Pentax Customer Support stated without question that as soon as the SDHC standard is completed they would be supporting it. 4 and 8G SD cards are waiting in the wings for that standard.

For me, 2G per card is more than satisfactory at present ... That's 190 or so RAW images, enough for one card. When the 10Mpixel body comes out, and presuming the same large PEF size files grow with the higher resolution, I'll be looking for the SDHC card standard... ;-)

Godfrey

vprace said:

ok that tiny bit smaller they can make the camera helps and at the
top of the list of complaints is no grip! go figure!
all the tiny stuff is ok for the "prosumer" gear but if pentax
wants to gain any respect among working photogs they had better
start considering building a decent piece of equipment.

Click to expand...

Maybe I am out of touch but I have always thought the Pentax 135 system is about amateur, or serious amateur. Yeah I am aware the history of LX and at one time some pro used it. But the truth remains most working pros use Canon or Nikon for practical reasons. Not even Minolta could make a dent with all the tricks they tried. Pentax tried, big bodies didn't sell. Time and again proved small bodies work for Pentax, Spotmatic (small at the time), M series, LX, A series, MZ/ZX series, and now *ist series. But really, some brag about the compactness of the *ist bodies, yet add a vertical grip to make it big (but I am sure there are those who really need it).
--
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan/

Your right, it would be a long shot...... but was interested in current opinions as well. One of the benefits of a "small" company is some of these things can be changed on the fly so to speak. Also as far as I know all we saw were prototypes of the K10.... combo slots could be an off the rack commodity, and I have a feeling that the body moulding could also be changed. This is not a sensor swap or anything drastic (maybe)..
SD is more of keeping w/ the small size philosophy.......
--
360 minutes from the prime meridian. (-5375min, 3.55sec) 1093' above sea level.

Consider that CF cards require a delicate connector
in the hosting device (i.e. the camera). A bit of lint
or grit can destroy that connector. The cost of
repair can be prohibitive (the initial fabrication is
done by machine, rework is very tedious and time-
consuming).
SD, on the other hand, is a rather more rugged arrangement.
The device has surface contacts where foreign matter
can usually be removed by removing and re-inserting the
card (there are no small contact holes for lint & grit to
become lodged in).

Electrically, the SD interface is simpler (only 9 contacts),
taking less routing resources on the circuit board (many fewer
signals to route) and on the gate array (fewer pins) resulting
in lower cost. Even the connector is less expensive, again
mechaincally simpler.

The problems we see now with 4GB cards are protocol
issues, that will probably be addressed with a software upgrade
(as we have already seen an upgrade on the DS for 2GB cards).

Also consider the issues we have seen with micro-drives in
Canon, Nikon, and the D. Where having the power requirements
of the drive not being well handled by the camera resulting in image
quality problems (the SD cards aren't immune to banding issues either,
of course).

The net result is I believe you'll see CF or CF/SD appearing in
the top-of-the-line models only. Mid-range and entery-level will
have to use the card that is least expensive to produce and cover
under warranty.

Proprietary formats (i.e. Smartmedia and the XD follow-on and Sony's
memory stick faminly) are, fortuantely for us, usually burdened by licensing
fees. It will be interesting to see what Sony does with memory cards in
their newly acquired lineup. What will Olympus be using in their SLR lineup
in the future (will CF/xD be supplanted by xD only to reduce cost)?

-Willy

--
360 minutes from the prime meridian. (-5375min, 3.55sec) 1093' above sea level.

Godfrey said:

Pentax Customer Support stated without question that as soon as the
SDHC standard is completed they would be supporting it. 4 and 8G SD
cards are waiting in the wings for that standard.

Click to expand...

I don't know what SDHC is. If I now put my CF cards in a drawer and buy several MB of SD cards, does SDHC mean that in a little while I will have to put the SD cards in a drawer and buy SDHC?

Joe

Joseph Tainter said:

Godfrey said:

Pentax Customer Support stated without question that as soon as the
SDHC standard is completed they would be supporting it. 4 and 8G SD
cards are waiting in the wings for that standard.

Click to expand...

I don't know what SDHC is. If I now put my CF cards in a drawer and
buy several MB of SD cards, does SDHC mean that in a little while I
will have to put the SD cards in a drawer and buy SDHC?

Click to expand...

SDHC is SD High Capacity - a backwards-compatible extension to the
SD format to allow cards of greater than 2GB capacity. If the SD cards
you buy today are SD compliant (which implies 2GB or less capacity)
then you will be able to continue to use them. If you buy larger SD
cards, though, they might not work. But that's nothing new - they
don't work in all SD devices, even today.

As per subject

When I sold my Dimage 7i for the *ist DS I let all my CF cards go with it. It may not have added to the value but it probably made the deal slightly more attractive.

I knew that once I had a DSLR I would need a "carry around" camera and that SD would be more likely to be the card of choice. My kids not also have slightly more serious cameras (3mp instead of old DC240 Kodaks) and they take SD cards

Maximum capacity is not an issue for me anyway - I like to spread the risk (of physical loss as well as data loss) by not using cards bigger than 512Mb.

Having said that, the cost of cards is no longer much of an issue - prices have plumeted lately. 512Mb is down to £7.99UKP (at 7 day shop) - I remember paying £80 for 15 MB of CF card some years ago.

--
Terry
London

*isteve said:

Would be annoyed at a single slot CF, since I had to buy a load of
SD cards for the DS even though I had a D. Now I use SD in the D
with a converter.

Click to expand...

I've just gone the same route. I've put my biggest CF card in my old Optio 430rs (which lives in a scuba diving housing these days), and bought MINI SD cards (which come with SD adapters) because that's what my phone uses. I've since found work is going to swap the phone for one that uses Micro-SD (sigh)...

I've got an SD-CF adapter for the *ist-D, a USB key which takes SD. and an SD slot on my laptop. SD and even Mini-SD is so cheap now it's just not an issue to go out and buy a couple of 1GB cards. I'd rather fill a 1GB and transfer it, while I shoot on a second card than go out with just a 2GB card.

Wim
--
Belgium, GMT+1

Everything I have uses CF cards, including two *ist D bodies. Dual slot would be OK.
A *istD successor with SD only would not look good in its class.

Greg Stark said:

Godfrey said:

How is CF "more capable"?

Click to expand...

Capacity! SD is only designed to handle up to 2 GB. CF easily
handles 8 GB. The 4 GB SD cards that people are seeing are
non-standard (i.e., read "a kludge!"), and it is likely that these

Click to expand...

I'm convinved by this. You'll be able to get 100 RAW shots, and 400 JPGs from the 10MP camera on a 2GB card. If you're shooting more than that in one go, you swap cards and transfer to something else. Kludge or not 4GB works. There are only a small number of people who want more than 4GB but will find 8GB is enough - i.e. if 4GB is too small they need 10 or 20GB. It would be far better to support a firewire tethered interface to a PC (or UMPC) and miss out temporary storage on a card. One class of "pro" - the studio shooter - would prefer that

You could argue that leaving PCMCIA behind was a big mistake, because that will take bigger drives still. There seems to be a lot more innovation in SD cards now. CF modems, network cards, cameras for PDAs have all dropped off the market. SD is where the innovation is. There's a long tail of support for CF.

I will soon have a 3G phone with a Micro-sd slot, so I'll be able to remove my card from the adapter that puts in the camera plug it in the phone and mail high res pictures, quickly. This is what the another class of pro - the press photographer - wants. I don't beleive there is a single 3G device with CF support, so for these guys CF is a legacy you work round with adapters etc.

Even if SD were lower capacity and slower, I'd still take it over CF simply because it doesn't require 80 fragile pins to interface with. Having paid $150 to replace the slot in a Canon camera I now appreciate the intelligent design that went into SD. ;D

As has been pointed out, the professional Pentaxographer is a rare beast indeed and does not represent a core or even significant market. If you're shooting enough raw frames that 2Gb is a real limitation, you're probably shooting C or N. SD all the way, baby!

--
Pentax Lens Wiki: http://y3m.net/penwik/

Greg Stark said:

Godfrey said:

How is CF "more capable"?

Click to expand...

Capacity! SD is only designed to handle up to 2 GB. CF easily
handles 8 GB. The 4 GB SD cards that people are seeing are
non-standard (i.e., read "a kludge!"), and it is likely that these
cards will be orpaned once a new standard is adopted.

Click to expand...

How does this "kludge" work differently from a user's point of view?

Greg Stark said:

I know that some people love to go on and on and the theorectical
advantages of SD with respect to write speed, but such arguements,
at least to date, are irrelavent (i.e., although it is a problem
that I would love to have, I don't think that Pentax will be
pushing the limits of either technology in this respect).

Click to expand...

The following situations happens many times in real life, not anything "theoretical" as you allege:
1. CF pin got bent.
2. CF holes on the card got clogged
3. People can share the SD card between their PDA and the Camera but not the CF.

Greg Stark said:

Greg Stark said:

I have both formats and see no difference in function whatever.

Click to expand...

I agree as far as function although I do appreciate the lower cost
per gigabyte of CF. Plus, it is nice not to have to stop and swap
cards in the middle of a shoot (again, that ol' issue of
capacity...).

Click to expand...

Again, if SD can have a higher capacity with "a hack", or whatever, out of curiosity, how does it affect user experience, or are the disadvantages of this "kludge" just...theoretical?

Greg Stark said:

Greg Stark said:

SD are smaller and easier to handle.

Click to expand...

Purely personal preference... I sure appreciate the larger size of
CF cards when doing winter photography. At other times, I don't
see much difference except that the SD cards are a little easier to
extract.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Different people have different hands, some find SD easier to handle and some find CF easier to handle.

Greg Stark said:

Greg Stark said:

That said, the design for the 10Mpixel body is likely already cast
in stone and I doubt very strongly that it is anything other than
SD compatible.

Click to expand...

You're may be right about Petax using SD in the 10Mpixel body, but
I sure hope not. Now, on the other hand, if the new standard for
SD's successor is ratified by that time, and Pentax chooses to
support this new standard, I'd be all for it.

Click to expand...

Zaldidun said:

Everything I have uses CF cards, including two *ist D bodies. Dual
slot would be OK.
A *istD successor with SD only would not look good in its class.

Click to expand...

No dual slot, please. Either choose SD or CF. Dual slot only increases costs and of little practical value since not a lot of people use both slots at the same time. (unless it's dual CF-CF or dual SD-SD).

If it is going to be CF-only, a CF-SD adaptor should be bundled.

I already have the adapter for my D7...

--
Member of LBA (Lens Buyers Anonymous), M-fourty-two section
'LBA knows no bounds, and seeks no justification...' (Jim King, 2005)
http://www.jr-worldwi.de/photo/index.html - Photography, Tech and Geek stuff :}
'Why is everyone answering rhetorical questions?' (Me, 2005)