«

What is the preference of the readers of this group between having
either a 1 GB microdrive or 1 GB CF card? Logic tells me that the
microdrive having moving parts may not be as reliable as a CF card.
However, the camera shop that I deal with tells me that they have
received scant few microdrives back from customers - and they sell a
huge amount. Also, which will the camera write images to faster
between the two?

1 GB microdrive suck up more power....

Bob P.


"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in message
news:raLCb.131847$ .net...
> What is the preference of the readers of this group between having
> either a 1 GB microdrive or 1 GB CF card? Logic tells me that the
> microdrive having moving parts may not be as reliable as a CF card.
> However, the camera shop that I deal with tells me that they have
> received scant few microdrives back from customers - and they sell a
> huge amount. Also, which will the camera write images to faster
> between the two?
>
>

Not enough to worry about, perhaps the eqivalent of two flashes per battery
load/charge.

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 22:48:18 GMT, "Bob Pattinson" <>
found these unused words floating about:

>1 GB microdrive suck up more power....
>
>Bob P.
>
>
>"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in message
>news:raLCb.131847$ v.net...
>> What is the preference of the readers of this group between having
>> either a 1 GB microdrive or 1 GB CF card? Logic tells me that the
>> microdrive having moving parts may not be as reliable as a CF card.
>> However, the camera shop that I deal with tells me that they have
>> received scant few microdrives back from customers - and they sell a
>> huge amount. Also, which will the camera write images to faster
>> between the two?
>>
>>
>

theOn Sat, 13 Dec 2003 21:05:27 GMT, "Peter A. Stavrakoglou"
<> found these unused words floating about:

>What is the preference of the readers of this group between having
>either a 1 GB microdrive or 1 GB CF card? Logic tells me that the
>microdrive having moving parts may not be as reliable as a CF card.
>However, the camera shop that I deal with tells me that they have
>received scant few microdrives back from customers - and they sell a
>huge amount. Also, which will the camera write images to faster
>between the two?
>
If the card is 16x or better then it should be faster than the microdrive.

If the price is the same, I'd opt for the card now. I've had a microdrive
for two years in all extremes and only had one problem.

That was when I tried writing to it at a fairly fast, constatnt rate with an
intervalometer. One picture every 6 seconds. I think it over heated (desert)
and a few images had garbage 'bars'.

Reformatted - there's not been a bad image since - now well over a year!

J. A. Mc. wrote:

> That was when I tried writing to it at a fairly fast, constatnt rate
> with an intervalometer. One picture every 6 seconds. I think it over
> heated (desert) and a few images had garbage 'bars'.
>
> Reformatted - there's not been a bad image since - now well
> over a year!

I've had a 1GB Microdrive for years and not a single problem.
Still, it's not as fast as a 1GB CF card when writing RAW files
and therefore I now use it only as a backup. At the time I bought
it, it was a TERRIFIC bargain (1GB flash cards didn't even exist
and a 256mb card would actually cost a lot more), but now
that prices of memory are at a historical low, I'm not sure the
marginal savings make it a viable alternative.

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 23:38:19 GMT, "Paolo Pizzi"
<> found these unused words floating about:

>J. A. Mc. wrote:
>
>> That was when I tried writing to it at a fairly fast, constatnt rate
>> with an intervalometer. One picture every 6 seconds. I think it over
>> heated (desert) and a few images had garbage 'bars'.
>>
>> Reformatted - there's not been a bad image since - now well
>> over a year!
>
>I've had a 1GB Microdrive for years and not a single problem.
>Still, it's not as fast as a 1GB CF card when writing RAW files
>and therefore I now use it only as a backup. At the time I bought
>it, it was a TERRIFIC bargain (1GB flash cards didn't even exist
>and a 256mb card would actually cost a lot more), but now
>that prices of memory are at a historical low, I'm not sure the
>marginal savings make it a viable alternative.
>
Thanks for the snip to make it appear I said it was a better choice!

My comment was "If the price is the same, I'd opt for the card now. "

J. A. Mc. wrote:

>> I've had a 1GB Microdrive for years and not a single problem.
>> Still, it's not as fast as a 1GB CF card when writing RAW files
>> and therefore I now use it only as a backup. At the time I bought
>> it, it was a TERRIFIC bargain (1GB flash cards didn't even exist
>> and a 256mb card would actually cost a lot more), but now
>> that prices of memory are at a historical low, I'm not sure the
>> marginal savings make it a viable alternative.
>>
> Thanks for the snip to make it appear I said it was a better choice!

Sorry if it appeared so, it wasn't my intention at all.
More like a confirmation.

> My comment was "If the price is the same, I'd opt for the card now. "

Good choice.

Since you have the choice now, get the CF card. They're far more
durable and don't have 10,000' altitude limits like microdrives. CF
card won't even notice being dropped onto a hard surface from 3'.
We've even seen credible reports of CF cards surviving washing
machines. I don't think microdrives have anywhere near that kind of
durability. To my mind, microdrive writing speeds would have to be a
lot faster to offset the durability advantage.

More and more devices with CF or PC card slots are microdrive
compatible, but I think you'd also be better off with a CF card on the
compatibility front with PDAs, etc.
--
Jeremy McCreary
Denver, CO
www.cliffshade.com/dpfwiw/
-------------------------------------------


"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in message
news:raLCb.131847$ .net...
| What is the preference of the readers of this group between having
| either a 1 GB microdrive or 1 GB CF card? Logic tells me that the
| microdrive having moving parts may not be as reliable as a CF card.
| However, the camera shop that I deal with tells me that they have
| received scant few microdrives back from customers - and they sell a
| huge amount. Also, which will the camera write images to faster
| between the two?
|
|

>From: "Peter A. Stavrakoglou"

>What is the preference of the readers of this group between having
>either a 1 GB microdrive or 1 GB CF card?

I have one of each, a 1 GB IBM udrive that came with a D30 and a 1 GB Lexar 32x
WA we bought earlier this year.

The Lexar is somewhat faster and seems to use less power, the microdrive has
about 5% more capacity even though they are both nominally 1 GB.

If they were the same price I'd get the Lexar. If the microdrive is about $50
cheaper I'd probably go for it instead.

Bill

Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:

> What is the preference of the readers of this group between having
> either a 1 GB microdrive or 1 GB CF card? Logic tells me that the
> microdrive having moving parts may not be as reliable as a CF card.
> However, the camera shop that I deal with tells me that they have
> received scant few microdrives back from customers - and they sell a
> huge amount. Also, which will the camera write images to faster
> between the two?
>
>
I would expect the CF card to be a bit more secure, but there are
stories of microdrives surviving unbelieveable trauma, such as one that
survived the WTC disaster.
At the moment, the microdrive may be a bit cheaper..