Just say no to XD memory!!!

u19925 · Sep 19, 2002

The reason why APS cameras failed is because, by the time they came out, nobody needed film cameras and whoever needed could buy legacy 35 mm ones. Similarly, xD will fail because, in not too distant future, people won't need removable memory in digital cameras and whoever needs can use compactflash/ms/sm/sd/mmc/floppy/superdisk/cd etc.

Currently, we need removable storage, since the max_storage to megapixel is not very high. Bug imagine a camera with built-in 2G memory. Would you still buy external storage? For me, I would just by a portable harddrive with 10-20 GB capacity (10 GB mp3 players cost about USD-160) and empty my camera memory to it. My feeling is that as memory prices become very low, it would be advantageous for camera maker to buy it from OEM and integrate in camera. I would guess in a couple of years, the cost of integrating 2GB should fall to about USD-100.

So, I think in 2004-2005, we may not see many new digital cameras with removable storage!

--dhiraj

Zaphod said:
So now, Olympus and Fuji can't seem to admit that they were wrong
to use smart cards in the past (although they sort of did by adding
CF to their higher end cameras), they invent a new, smaller,
supposedly better memory system. Of course it will be released at
128mb as the maximum with promises of 256 and above really soon.
Didn't we hear promises of 1gb on a Smart Card?

Phil Wheeler · Sep 19, 2002

dhiraj said:
Bug imagine a camera with built-in 2G
memory. Would you still buy external storage? For me, I would just
by a portable harddrive with 10-20 GB capacity (10 GB mp3 players
cost about USD-160) and empty my camera memory to it. My feeling is
that as memory prices become very low, it would be advantageous for
camera maker to buy it from OEM and integrate in camera. I would
guess in a couple of years, the cost of integrating 2GB should fall
to about USD-100.

So, I think in 2004-2005, we may not see many new digital cameras
with removable storage!

A terrible trade off. I'd rather carry small cards than a relatively power hungry HDD which can fail in the field; Bulk and weight will both be better.

Phil

Qwerty13 · Sep 19, 2002

Gene Miller said:
I won't go into the idea of DVD recordable format. Waiting for one
to take hold. As far as the SD card hold a lot of MB's, the largest
now is 128 MB. They were suppose to have a 1 GB by the beginning of
this year. So they must be having problems. I went to COMDEX last
year and got my information straight from Panasonic.

They already have 256 and 512 SD cards. Panasonic's part number is: RPSDH512

u19925 · Sep 19, 2002

You won't need to carry external HDD to the field. That is the main idea. 2GB built in memory can store about 1000, 5-MP photos at standard compression mode. That is several times more than your battery capacity and I am sure, 99% people don't carry more than 2 sets of battries in the field. So there is no hard drive to carry to the field and no possibility of failure. You will be transferring data only once in a while (how long does it take for an average shooter to shoot 1000 photos that he/she wishes to keep?).

Also, power hungry term doesn't apply here, since you would be doing transfer just once after every 1000 or so photos.

--dhiraj

Phil Wheeler said:
A terrible trade off. I'd rather carry small cards than a
relatively power hungry HDD which can fail in the field; Bulk and
weight will both be better.

Phil

Qwerty13 · Sep 19, 2002

Built in memory was in the older digital cameras like the DC-40, before they had reasonable sizes of removeable cards. The reason they will never make built in memory again is compatability. If the camera has built in memory, the camera must be compatable with the computer. But with removeable memory you can either use the camera to download or you can use a card reader which is much easier to work with a computer than the camera itself. For example; some people bought digital cameras years ago when they had serial ports. They were compatable with Windows NT. Now these same people wnt the newer cameras but they still own Windows NT computers. So they buy a parallel card reader to download the images into the computer. They could not use a USB or firewire camera if it had built in memory. The same problem might occur when switching from 2000 to XP ro 9.2 to X. They would eventually write new software for the camera but it would be a paper weight until then.

dhiraj said:
Also, power hungry term doesn't apply here, since you would be
doing transfer just once after every 1000 or so photos.

--dhiraj

Phil Wheeler said:

A terrible trade off. I'd rather carry small cards than a
relatively power hungry HDD which can fail in the field; Bulk and
weight will both be better.

Phil

Click to expand...

u19925 · Sep 20, 2002

Card readers and compatible! you are making me laugh. I haven't seen a single card reader supporting more than Windows and Macs, the same as most digital cameras!

Card readers are tiny devices and hence it is hard to make them compatible with many OSes, while cameras are large, contain lot more firmware and hence it is easy to make them compatible with multiple OSes.

I have seen people using card readers but only in three cases:

1. they have older cameras with slow serial port
2. in studio, it is impractical to remove camera from tripod and
connect to PC
3. They don't want to consume carmera battery and don't want to
go through hassle of cord connections.

Case 1 is only for old cameras.
Case 2 is only for indoor commercial use which are mostly SLRs.
Case 3 is only because the current standard USB 1.1 connection is

slow (and hence will consume more battery) and external card sizes are slow (and hence need frequent transfer).

None of the above apply for future non-SLR cameras with large built-in memory and with USB2.0/IEEE-1394 connection.

--dhiraj

Zaphod said:
Built in memory was in the older digital cameras like the DC-40,
before they had reasonable sizes of removeable cards. The reason
they will never make built in memory again is compatability. If the
camera has built in memory, the camera must be compatable with the
computer. But with removeable memory you can either use the camera
to download or you can use a card reader which is much easier to
work with a computer than the camera itself. For example; some
people bought digital cameras years ago when they had serial ports.
They were compatable with Windows NT. Now these same people wnt the
newer cameras but they still own Windows NT computers. So they buy
a parallel card reader to download the images into the computer.
They could not use a USB or firewire camera if it had built in
memory. The same problem might occur when switching from 2000 to XP
ro 9.2 to X. They would eventually write new software for the
camera but it would be a paper weight until then.

iamphil · Sep 21, 2002

dhiraj said:
You won't need to carry external HDD to the field. That is the main
idea. 2GB built in memory can store about 1000, 5-MP photos at
standard compression mode. That is several times more than your
battery capacity and I am sure, 99% people don't carry more than 2
sets of battries in the field. So there is no hard drive to carry
to the field and no possibility of failure. You will be
transferring data only once in a while (how long does it take for
an average shooter to shoot 1000 photos that he/she wishes to
keep?).

Also, power hungry term doesn't apply here, since you would be
doing transfer just once after every 1000 or so photos.

Why not use a 2GB removable memory card? What's the difference? If your camera breaks, you'll lose the expensive memory inside too.

Eric Carlson · Sep 21, 2002

dhiraj said:
Card readers and compatible! you are making me laugh. I haven't
seen a single card reader supporting more than Windows and Macs,
the same as most digital cameras!

Card readers are tiny devices and hence it is hard to make them
compatible with many OSes, while cameras are large, contain lot
more firmware and hence it is easy to make them compatible with
multiple OSes.

Device size has nothing to do with OS compatibility. It is no easier to write a device driver for a large device than it is to wriite one for a small device.

There are most likely Linux drivers out there for some card readers, and if the OS supports PCMCIA storage devices, it will work with a PCMCIA card reader. Also, if the OS supports storage class USB devices, then it should work with any storage class reader or camera.
--

Eric, http://www.InvisibleRobot.com/

Eric Carlson · Sep 21, 2002

Interesting theory, but it sounds backwards to me. The cheap digital cameras had built-in memory, and you had to use a cable to get the images off your camera before you could take more photos.

I don't see digital cameras getting rid of the removeable media until some sort of universal, automatic, high-speed, wireless image transfer is in existence, and I don't see that happening for at least 5 years.

When cameras (and all other devices) have ubiquitous, high-speed, wireless internet (or at least short-range) connections, then there will be far less need for removeable storage.
--

Eric, http://www.InvisibleRobot.com/

jk · Oct 3, 2002

relax zaphod ahem xd will get to 512 and 1 gig before sony memory stick

i am not a prophet so i cant predict the futire of xd but the trend is many more companies using the sd/mmc format and looks like fuji/olumpus are joined at the hip with xd and sony is stuck up their rear with memory stick , actually sony is coming out with the duo card that will start at 128 megs and go upo and will be compatible to some devices using memory stick with an adapter so technicaly if sony does a firmware on the dscf717 it will be able too use the higher memory duo cards

Zaphod said:
Gene Miller said:

The memory we use is dictated by the cameras we own and new ones we
may buy. I don't understand why one would not want to see progress
in the field of memory storage development. I think Olympus is
doing us a great service by allowing the new memory cards to be
used with the SM cards in the same camera. With your logic you
should boycott color television and HDTV. Suit yourself but I think
you may be a troll.

Click to expand...

Gene,

Color TV was an improvement to b/w TV because most people see the
world in color, therefore TV should look more like the world. HDTV
is an improvmement in the sharpness of the image. Since what we see
with our eyes is generally sharper than TV. HDTV is better because
it gives a sharper more color accurate view, closer to what the eye
really sees. Just as the E-20 has higher res than the E-10, that is
another improvement.

Now that we have established what an IMPROVEMENT actually is, let's
talk about camera memory.

XD is better because:
it is smaller
it has a lower power drain
it might be faster?
it puts more money in the pockets of Fuji and Olympus

CF is better because:
it's cheaper
it has greater capacities
it is compatable with more cameras than any other type of memory
it is not so huge that you'll break your shoulder carrying them
it is fast enough for the average user and most pro's

If XD had equal capacities TODAY (or even 256) at near the same
price as CF cards, I would not be so down on it. It is not an
improvement. It's different and has a very samll potential to be
better. So small, it's worth ignoring.

Now pay your toll and answer me these questions 3!

What's is your name?

What is your quest?

What is the flight velocity of a swallow?

--
beam me up scotty

im giving it all shes got captain

jk · Oct 8, 2002

hey dudes both of u coolpix and zaphod

the more memory card types the merrier

actualy there is a reason to sony and olympus madness regarding their inability to make the mem stick and sm cards larger than 128 mb

sony does not have the ability to make larger than 128 mb
either because of legal issues because of their agreement with lexar
or something else

either way there is bound to be more memory types anyways

and yes it is cool that after u shoot pictures u can then insert the card into a cell phone and email them to people

hey more variety is also good more things to sell and you look more impressive in the customers eye when u know more about the stuff
sort of like shooting a weding with a ****** camera than a smaller one

misha said:
Nik Coolpix said:

no, not really. coz at our company we take pride in KNOWING THE FACTS.
and personally, i think you'd benefit too if you adopted the same
kind of thinking before starting a thread like this one, in which
you're making such STUPID REMARKS about things that it is so
obvious you know VERY little about.

rgds,

Click to expand...

Hmm... that's an odd combination - accusing the other side of
STUPID remarks followed by "regards". For the record, both Phil of
this site's fame and Steve of Steve's Digicams voiced serious
doubts about the need for yet another proprietary memory format -
and they presumably know a thing or two about the subject. For the
moment XDs are still limited to the same 128Mb - 256 is promised
in December - more often than not promised dates are not kept;
recall that when Memory sticks were introduced we were also offered
an ambitious development curve - to 1GB within a couple of years.
XDs are not compatible at this point with any other devices (unlike
SDs which you can move from your camera to camcorder to cell phone

multimedia, as you said) - and since they were introduced by

camera makers, they will likely be confined to cameras and related
products, like photo printers, for some time. I'm certainly not
calling for boycott, little we can do anyway, but I don't quite see
it as progress, more like trying to profit from proprietary
technology, for which Olympus is known unfortunately (e.g. its
overpriced flash accessories, restricting its panorama function to
Olympus cards, etc.)

--
Misha

--
beam me up scotty

im giving it all shes got captain

aka1nas · Oct 8, 2002

Actually Zaphod, XD is going to retail for the same price as CF and Smartmedia cards. We are getting our first batch of Fuji XD cards this week at Best Buy. Whether or not the non-retail prices will be similar remains to be seen. XD, as well as smartmedia both have or had the potential to be cheaper to produce, as they contain no controller circuitry in the card itself. Smartmedia was architecturally limited, which was the main reason it was so expensive for so long relative to CF. Also, they were having production problems before Sandisk starting taking over production.

In the long run, card formats on a digital camera aren't as big of a deal as some people on this board make them out to be. They aren't consumable, which means you are probably only going to buy a few of the cards and aren't going to have to worry about being able to find the cards years later or at any old store when you are on vacation.

Zaphod said:
Gene Miller said:

The memory we use is dictated by the cameras we own and new ones we
may buy. I don't understand why one would not want to see progress
in the field of memory storage development. I think Olympus is
doing us a great service by allowing the new memory cards to be
used with the SM cards in the same camera. With your logic you
should boycott color television and HDTV. Suit yourself but I think
you may be a troll.

Click to expand...

Gene,

Color TV was an improvement to b/w TV because most people see the
world in color, therefore TV should look more like the world. HDTV
is an improvmement in the sharpness of the image. Since what we see
with our eyes is generally sharper than TV. HDTV is better because
it gives a sharper more color accurate view, closer to what the eye
really sees. Just as the E-20 has higher res than the E-10, that is
another improvement.

Now that we have established what an IMPROVEMENT actually is, let's
talk about camera memory.

XD is better because:
it is smaller
it has a lower power drain
it might be faster?
it puts more money in the pockets of Fuji and Olympus

CF is better because:
it's cheaper
it has greater capacities
it is compatable with more cameras than any other type of memory
it is not so huge that you'll break your shoulder carrying them
it is fast enough for the average user and most pro's

If XD had equal capacities TODAY (or even 256) at near the same
price as CF cards, I would not be so down on it. It is not an
improvement. It's different and has a very samll potential to be
better. So small, it's worth ignoring.

Now pay your toll and answer me these questions 3!

What's is your name?

What is your quest?

What is the flight velocity of a swallow?

--
Olympus C-3000z

misha · Oct 8, 2002

aka1nas said:
In the long run, card formats on a digital camera aren't as big of
a deal as some people on this board make them out to be. They
aren't consumable, which means you are probably only going to buy a
few of the cards and aren't going to have to worry about being able
to find the cards years later or at any old store when you are on
vacation.

I thought this thread had been dead and buried, but since it's coming back to life...

The key as I see it is compatibility and interchangeability. Yes, you can survive with any media your camera uses, if you go on using the camera forever - but that's unlikely. With the fast progress of digital imaging many will replace their cameras within 2-3 years. If the number of card standards remains reasonable, they can choose to use their investment into storage cards and buy a camera that uses the same type of card, all other things being equal. However, if just about every camera manufacturer starts inventing their own standard, you'll have to pick a camera from the same company or buy new cards with your new camera.

Besides, cards are not just for cameras - Smartmedia are widely used in MP3 players, SD - in phones and PDAs. You can't take your XD card from the camera and slip it into your phone to send a picture to a friend. Again, if you are shopping for a new camera, with 2 or 3 memory formats you can go to store with your own card and snap a few test pictures - not so if there are lots of different standards. Kind of like if some computers only had floppy drives, others only CD-ROM, still others only Zip - not easy to exchange data.

But certainly it's not that big a deal, I just do not agree that the more diverse storage formats there are, the better.
--
Misha

jk · Oct 8, 2002

zaphod there are still some cameras with built in memory just not a lot of memory

fer instance some kodak digital cameras have built in memory

built in memory in cameras in the amounts of 2 gigs or more are not so far fetched

as physical size comes down and memory amount goes up i can forsee the pro cameras getting some nice size internal memory

already as we speak ibm has developed internaly (in their r&d dept) a microdrive size card that can store 5 terrabytes

Zaphod said:
dhiraj said:

Also, power hungry term doesn't apply here, since you would be
doing transfer just once after every 1000 or so photos.

--dhiraj

Phil Wheeler said:

A terrible trade off. I'd rather carry small cards than a
relatively power hungry HDD which can fail in the field; Bulk and
weight will both be better.

Phil

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
beam me up scotty

im giving it all shes got captain

aka1nas · Oct 8, 2002

Smartmedia is rarely if ever used on anything but cameras anymore. No PDA has used for as long as I know, the list of SmartMedia MP3 players is getting thinner as well. I think dumping SM will have very little if any impact on consumers. Even if they are going to be reusing their cards 3 years from now, they will probably need larger capacity cards anyway. If you bought a camera 3 years ago, you would probably have gotten no more than 16MB with it as at that time, that was a relatively expensive card and it was also able to take a decent amount of pics at the resolutions available at that time. In another 3 years, 128MB will be insufficient for the 6,7, and 8 MP images that your next camera will probably take.(If you are an enthusiast or amateur photographer this doesn't apply to you, because we will always find a way to fill up all of our memory ;> ).)

misha said:
aka1nas said:

In the long run, card formats on a digital camera aren't as big of
a deal as some people on this board make them out to be. They
aren't consumable, which means you are probably only going to buy a
few of the cards and aren't going to have to worry about being able
to find the cards years later or at any old store when you are on
vacation.

Click to expand...

I thought this thread had been dead and buried, but since it's
coming back to life...
The key as I see it is compatibility and interchangeability. Yes,
you can survive with any media your camera uses, if you go on using
the camera forever - but that's unlikely. With the fast progress of
digital imaging many will replace their cameras within 2-3 years.
If the number of card standards remains reasonable, they can choose
to use their investment into storage cards and buy a camera that
uses the same type of card, all other things being equal. However,
if just about every camera manufacturer starts inventing their own
standard, you'll have to pick a camera from the same company or buy
new cards with your new camera.
Besides, cards are not just for cameras - Smartmedia are widely
used in MP3 players, SD - in phones and PDAs. You can't take your
XD card from the camera and slip it into your phone to send a
picture to a friend. Again, if you are shopping for a new camera,
with 2 or 3 memory formats you can go to store with your own card
and snap a few test pictures - not so if there are lots of
different standards. Kind of like if some computers only had floppy
drives, others only CD-ROM, still others only Zip - not easy to
exchange data.
But certainly it's not that big a deal, I just do not agree that
the more diverse storage formats there are, the better.
--
Misha

--
Olympus C-3000z

Qwerty13 · Oct 9, 2002

jk said:
zaphod there are still some cameras with built in memory just not a
lot of memory

fer instance some kodak digital cameras have built in memory

built in memory in cameras in the amounts of 2 gigs or more are not
so far fetched

as physical size comes down and memory amount goes up i can forsee
the pro cameras getting some nice size internal memory

already as we speak ibm has developed internaly (in their r&d dept)
a microdrive size card that can store 5 terrabytes

IBM hasn't developed anything beyond 1gb. Maybe it's inside their building but I don't say it exists until money has been exchanged and it is in the hands of an end user.

XD cards are out now but only up to 64mb. Remember stock and smart promissed to go beyond 128mb and where are they now? I'll endorse XD card when they exceed 256mb and sell at nearly the same price as CF.

Read the time line on digital cameras. Kodak made a DCS camera on a Nikon body that did not have removeable memory, held about 50 photos. They also made a DC-40 with 8mb built in. Then they came out with the DC-50, DSC-420 and DSC-460 which had REMOVEABLE memory. Now, which cameras are compatable with todays computers (Windows XP, Mac OS X, etc)? The ones with removeable memory. You use a card reader and f#@* the camera software. But if you hook a DC-40 to your brand new XP Gateway, you are the one who is f#@ ed.

Now that removeable memory is so cheap, that is the way cameras will stay. If you had a pro camera with a large internal capacity, and then you upgrade to the latest OS, your camera might not work.

Qwerty13 · Oct 9, 2002

aka1nas said:
Smartmedia is rarely if ever used on anything but cameras anymore.
No PDA has used for as long as I know, the list of SmartMedia MP3
players is getting thinner as well. I think dumping SM will have
very little if any impact on consumers. Even if they are going to
be reusing their cards 3 years from now, they will probably need
larger capacity cards anyway. If you bought a camera 3 years ago,
you would probably have gotten no more than 16MB with it as at that
time, that was a relatively expensive card and it was also able to
take a decent amount of pics at the resolutions available at that
time. In another 3 years, 128MB will be insufficient for the 6,7,
and 8 MP images that your next camera will probably take.(If you
are an enthusiast or amateur photographer this doesn't apply to
you, because we will always find a way to fill up all of our memory
;> ).)

What about the people who bought the c-4040, the fuji 6900 or the d-40 with in the last year? They thought SM cards might get bigger and they need more than 128mb for these high res SM only cameras. They got screwed.

Now you can buy the c-50, and when they don't ship a 256mb card, don't say I didn't warn you.

I don't think Olympus is too confident in XD because the 5050 take XD too.

jk · Oct 9, 2002

zaphod the kodad easy share 4330 has 16 mb internal memory
besides a slot for sd/mmc cards

and yes i was told by a ibm insider they already have researched and made a 5 terrabyte md card its just not gonna be available to the public , possibly never

Zaphod said:
jk said:

zaphod there are still some cameras with built in memory just not a
lot of memory

fer instance some kodak digital cameras have built in memory

built in memory in cameras in the amounts of 2 gigs or more are not
so far fetched

as physical size comes down and memory amount goes up i can forsee
the pro cameras getting some nice size internal memory

already as we speak ibm has developed internaly (in their r&d dept)
a microdrive size card that can store 5 terrabytes

Click to expand...

IBM hasn't developed anything beyond 1gb. Maybe it's inside their
building but I don't say it exists until money has been exchanged
and it is in the hands of an end user.

XD cards are out now but only up to 64mb. Remember stock and smart
promissed to go beyond 128mb and where are they now? I'll endorse
XD card when they exceed 256mb and sell at nearly the same price as
CF.

Read the time line on digital cameras. Kodak made a DCS camera on a
Nikon body that did not have removeable memory, held about 50
photos. They also made a DC-40 with 8mb built in. Then they came
out with the DC-50, DSC-420 and DSC-460 which had REMOVEABLE
memory. Now, which cameras are compatable with todays computers
(Windows XP, Mac OS X, etc)? The ones with removeable memory. You
use a card reader and f#@* the camera software. But if you hook a
DC-40 to your brand new XP Gateway, you are the one who is f#@ ed.

Now that removeable memory is so cheap, that is the way cameras
will stay. If you had a pro camera with a large internal capacity,
and then you upgrade to the latest OS, your camera might not work.

--
beam me up scotty

im giving it all shes got captain

aka1nas · Oct 9, 2002

They in fact do have MDs up to 6GB now. However most cameras can't use them as they almost all still use a 16-bit filesystem which can only address 2GB max. The canon D60 is the only camera I know that accepts these bigger drives as it uses a 32-bit filesystem for storage.

Zaphod said:
jk said:

zaphod there are still some cameras with built in memory just not a
lot of memory

fer instance some kodak digital cameras have built in memory

built in memory in cameras in the amounts of 2 gigs or more are not
so far fetched

as physical size comes down and memory amount goes up i can forsee
the pro cameras getting some nice size internal memory

already as we speak ibm has developed internaly (in their r&d dept)
a microdrive size card that can store 5 terrabytes

Click to expand...

IBM hasn't developed anything beyond 1gb. Maybe it's inside their
building but I don't say it exists until money has been exchanged
and it is in the hands of an end user.

XD cards are out now but only up to 64mb. Remember stock and smart
promissed to go beyond 128mb and where are they now? I'll endorse
XD card when they exceed 256mb and sell at nearly the same price as
CF.

Read the time line on digital cameras. Kodak made a DCS camera on a
Nikon body that did not have removeable memory, held about 50
photos. They also made a DC-40 with 8mb built in. Then they came
out with the DC-50, DSC-420 and DSC-460 which had REMOVEABLE
memory. Now, which cameras are compatable with todays computers
(Windows XP, Mac OS X, etc)? The ones with removeable memory. You
use a card reader and f#@* the camera software. But if you hook a
DC-40 to your brand new XP Gateway, you are the one who is f#@ ed.

Now that removeable memory is so cheap, that is the way cameras
will stay. If you had a pro camera with a large internal capacity,
and then you upgrade to the latest OS, your camera might not work.

--
Olympus C-3000z

aka1nas · Oct 9, 2002

They are and were never(at least for the last few years) going to ship the 256 card. and even it if did, the current cameras, including the 4040 and later, would not able to use it without at best a firmware upgrade. SM is not like CF in that the camera has to individually be able to detect each size card by itself. I.E. older Olympus cameras cannot use 128MB cards(some really old ones can't even use 64s.). On a CF camera, the controller is on the card and thus tells the camera how big it is. Which means that any CF card(up to 2GB, see my other post on why this is so), will(at least in theory) work with any CF camera.

Zaphod said:
aka1nas said:

Smartmedia is rarely if ever used on anything but cameras anymore.
No PDA has used for as long as I know, the list of SmartMedia MP3
players is getting thinner as well. I think dumping SM will have
very little if any impact on consumers. Even if they are going to
be reusing their cards 3 years from now, they will probably need
larger capacity cards anyway. If you bought a camera 3 years ago,
you would probably have gotten no more than 16MB with it as at that
time, that was a relatively expensive card and it was also able to
take a decent amount of pics at the resolutions available at that
time. In another 3 years, 128MB will be insufficient for the 6,7,
and 8 MP images that your next camera will probably take.(If you
are an enthusiast or amateur photographer this doesn't apply to
you, because we will always find a way to fill up all of our memory
;> ).)

Click to expand...

What about the people who bought the c-4040, the fuji 6900 or the
d-40 with in the last year? They thought SM cards might get bigger
and they need more than 128mb for these high res SM only cameras.
They got screwed.

Now you can buy the c-50, and when they don't ship a 256mb card,
don't say I didn't warn you.

I don't think Olympus is too confident in XD because the 5050 take
XD too.

--
Olympus C-3000z

Just say no to XD memory!!!

Well-known member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Well-known member

Leading Member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Well-known member

misha

Guest

Senior Member

Well-known member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts