Why CF?

I like the CF cards for the very same reasons and they are faster too.

mballent said:

CF just works, and when its cold outside I would rather deal with a
bigger card (physically) when you are wearing gloves, than those tiny
SD cards. plus the exposed terminals and they just feel more fragile.

--
-Michael
Just take the picture =)

Every man's work whether it be literature or music or pictures or
architecture or anything else is always a portrait of himself -Samuel
Butler

Equipment in profile
Gallery: http://www.ballentphoto.com
Blog: http://ballentphoto.blogspot.com

Click to expand...

--
Thomas

Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool
http://main.duplophotography.com/

Let's not forget that the people behind CF in the first place are workin on a new spec called CFast, which will be CF with SATA connectors and protocols for significantly improved speeds. It'll be a few years before these start showing up, but that plus the physical storage advantage that CF will always have over SD means that CF will remain my preferred format.
--
Terminal case of Lens Lust.

I have 2 SD cards for a P&S and one fails.

I have 9 CF cards for my DSLRs, none have failed.

Sorry, but I don't want SD cards in my DSLRs. CF cards are small enough.

Cheers,
JB

razorfish said:

Why does Nikon continue to push the outdated CF format? They use SD
in their consumer models, but professionals still have to struggle
with the cards of yesterday. Why not at least offer a dual storage
slot? SD cards are already cheaper than CF, and they are just as
fast, and have the same capacity. Why hang on to outdated technology
in this one area?

Click to expand...

thomas1973 said:

SD cards get lost. They are too small.

Click to expand...

Much easier to fit 2 SD slots in a camera than 2 (or even 1 !) CF slot. With 2 slots, you don't need to worry about changing SD cards in the field.

Cost and reliability of SD solution is better also.

The only reason the SD card looks so small is that the CF card is so honkin' BIG!

On the subject of speed, there is no electrical barrier to doubling SD card throughput with a clock speed doubling, and then doubling it again with an 8-bit data bus (instead of 4-bit) (and note that MMC+ is a 52MB/sec 8-bit interface).

CF will be the speed leader for a while, but few SLRs come close to using the potential data transfer speed of a well-design SD card (much less a high-speed CF card).

-- Bob Elkind
Family,in/outdoor sports, landscape, wildlife
photo galleries at http://eteam.zenfolio.com
my relationship with my camera is strictly photonic

razorfish said:

Why does Nikon continue to push the outdated CF format? They use SD
in their consumer models, but professionals still have to struggle
with the cards of yesterday. Why not at least offer a dual storage
slot? SD cards are already cheaper than CF, and they are just as
fast, and have the same capacity. Why hang on to outdated technology
in this one area?

Click to expand...

Most D700 buyers either come from film, or from other pro grade Nikon/Canon DSLRs and do have a significant stock of CFs.

Besides, many people will use D300/D700/D3 together and being able to work with a single set of card of a single type is a big plus.

So I am afraid I have to disagree with you, Nikon did obviously the right thing with CFs.

Cheers,
Bernard

Obviously you don't do much photography.

CF cards are equal or exceed the quality of the dinky little cards that are used in many of the consumer cameras.

When you are working fast doing a professional job you don't have time to screw around with thumbnail size, cards.
I hope you are happy with whatever it is you use.