largest CF capacity

[squeeze327491]

I have a 40D with 1.0.3 firmware. What is the largest CF card capacity it can handle safely? Also, when does CF card write speed matter? My shooting interest is mainly family and landscapes/travel. Thank you.

 

[BadtzMaru]

I cant find anywhere that canon states a max size (I've been vaguely curious). As it uses fat32 native it should be good up into the 2tb range for a file system. hardware limitations may impede on that but again, I haven't seen anything from canon. As for write speeds, the larger the card, the slower the card will write, but unless you are machine gunning the camera shouldn't have a problem keeping up with typical shooting. You can check http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/camera_multi_page.asp?cid=6007-9257 for more specific info.

 

[J A K]

"NT" means no text.

Joe Kurkjian

Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia



SEARCHING FOR A BETTER SELF PORTRAIT

 

[rdspear]

I have a 40D with 1.0.3 firmware. What is the largest CF card
capacity it can handle safely? Also, when does CF card write speed
matter? My shooting interest is mainly family and landscapes/travel.
Thank you.

I'm moderately certain it's 16GB. I know it can shoot with 16GB, and I'm pretty sure it can format 16GB in camera, unlike the earlier bodies.

CF write speed under about 11MB/s will be limiting on camera throughput (about 80x). Shooting with a 266x card vs. a 150x card yields single digit % throughput increases, and may be lower depending on the individual card. IMHO, anything over 133x, 40D throughput is essentially a wash.

 

[J A K]

I don't know, call me party pooper but I seriously doubt we will see a 2048GB capacity memory module in our lifetime. Now watch, next week .........

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian

Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia



SEARCHING FOR A BETTER SELF PORTRAIT

 

[BadtzMaru]

Ah, so it is 2tb where was that info, i've been wondering for ages if the limitation was the fat32 limit or a hardware one.

 

[rquimby]

Most Professionals that I have read, indicate that it is better to have several mid size cards and not one large card.

The "Don't have all your eggs in one basket" idea.

 

[BadtzMaru]

eh, like the filter no filter thing the eggs debate will rage on forever I think. I have spares but I haven't had any problems with my 8gb card.

 

[rdspear]

considering that the official CF specification only allows for cards up to 137GB

 

[get_the_picture]

I just ordered a transcend 133 16gb only $78.98 newegg.

in 2002 they announced for comdex a 3gb card! now thats too big!!

I still use my 2gb pqi 100 speed. but it fills fast when I shoot raw + Jpeg.

I have no doubt raw files are going to get big with sony breathing down on canon. for less than $80 you might get 5 years out of a 16 GB card!

When I get my next body hopefully this fall. Please canon release it. It may not have the frames per second my 40d does but I'm betting with the file size my cards will fill even faster.

Rob

--
Have to know why.

 

[J A K]

I would have thought that Canon's technical support folks (actually two of them communicated with me) would have known that little peice of information. Thanks for your feedback, it's appreciated.

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian

Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia



SEARCHING FOR A BETTER SELF PORTRAIT

 

[M Armani]

I said something simular to that when i paid 5K for a 80Mb seagate MFM drive..
--
Marcus Armani

http://www.armaniphotography.com/gallery
http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/31158.html

 

[J A K]

I said something simular to that when i paid 5K for a 80Mb seagate
MFM drive..
--
Marcus Armani

http://www.armaniphotography.com/gallery
http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/31158.html

Hi Marcus:

Yeah, I remember getting a 43 MB (at least I think that was the number) hard drive for my 386 machine; figured I could use that same drive for the next 10 years in every computer I would build. Boy, was I ever wrong, or stupid, or what?

Honestly, it's hard for me to relate back to the old days because today's cost per hard drive GB is an incredible bargain. I currently use two external 750 GB drives; sounds ridiculous to have that kind of capacity but I have every thing backed up and keep one of the drives in my neighbor's house in case my house burns down.

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian

Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia



SEARCHING FOR A BETTER SELF PORTRAIT

 

[BadtzMaru]

They are probably referring to the file system size limitation (of fat32) as opposed to the max CF size. I wouldn't be surprised if CF breaks the 28bit LBA limit for use in SSD's in the (near?) future.

 

[Ed Ellks]

I have no doubt raw files are going to get big with sony breathing
down on canon. for less than $80 you might get 5 years out of a 16
GB card!

I have a gut feeling that in 5 years, all of Canon's cameras will be using SDHC or an even newer technology. But in 5 years, I'll probably still happily be using the 40D.

While I know it does pose a risk, I shoot weddings with the 16GB card. I never have to worry about missing a shot while I'm changing cards. Most of all, I don't worry about losing the card with all the ceremony pictures while I'm at the reception or traveling to/from any intermediate photo locations. For me, that's a much bigger risk than the unlikely event of having a flash card suddenly go bad.

 

[Ovidiu Sopa]

IMHO, anything over 133x, 40D
throughput is essentially a wash.

I have tested today my 40D with the old Sandisk Ultra II (which I know its around 133x) versus new (CHEAP) card Silicon Power 200x 8GB

I set the camera on burts mode H and pressed the shuter until I saw the shoting rate was lowered because the buffer was full.

On my sandisk ultra II (2GB) I was able to shot 127 pictures
on my Silicon power 200x (8GB) I was able to shot 153 pictures

Camera on tripod, manual setings, same subject and ilumination.

Anyway if you don't do sport or action pictures you won;t need a faster card, or if you feel that the pictures are copied to slow from camera to computer, than probably you can think of buying 200x or faster.