No-name 512MB CF for $19 at Fry's

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Dave R knows who, Aug 10, 2005.

  1. After $15 rebate.

    If you have a 300D this is probably good enough as the speed-rated cards
    are worthless on that cam. Probably the XT, too.
     
    Dave R knows who, Aug 10, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Dave R knows who

    Proteus Guest

    Dave R knows who wrote:

    > After $15 rebate.
    >
    > If you have a 300D this is probably good enough as the speed-rated cards
    > are worthless on that cam. Probably the XT, too.



    Does not surprise me. I now use a 2GB CF card, own two other 512mb cards but
    never use them. Just as with computers, low memory cards will phase out as
    the need for memory increases for digital cameras.
     
    Proteus, Aug 11, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "Proteus" <> wrote in message
    news:EWvKe.5338$...
    > Dave R knows who wrote:
    >
    >> After $15 rebate.
    >>
    >> If you have a 300D this is probably good enough as the speed-rated
    >> cards
    >> are worthless on that cam. Probably the XT, too.

    >
    >
    > Does not surprise me. I now use a 2GB CF card, own two other 512mb cards
    > but
    > never use them. Just as with computers, low memory cards will phase out as
    > the need for memory increases for digital cameras.


    The problem with the large cards is you can shoot all day and if something
    happens you lose all your files. I had a 2GB lexar 80x give me some strange
    error when my 1D camera locked up on me once and I wanted to cry because I
    had a 3/4 of a day of shooting on the card. As it turns out, I got the
    images back, but now I'm considering using my old 1GB cards first and save
    the 2GB cards. I will not mind changing cards now.
     
    Dave R knows who, Aug 11, 2005
    #3
  4. Dave R knows who

    Proteus Guest

    Dave R knows who wrote:

    >
    > "Proteus" <> wrote in message
    > news:EWvKe.5338$...
    >> Dave R knows who wrote:
    >>
    >>> After $15 rebate.
    >>>
    >>> If you have a 300D this is probably good enough as the speed-rated
    >>> cards
    >>> are worthless on that cam. Probably the XT, too.

    >>
    >>
    >> Does not surprise me. I now use a 2GB CF card, own two other 512mb cards
    >> but
    >> never use them. Just as with computers, low memory cards will phase out
    >> as the need for memory increases for digital cameras.

    >
    > The problem with the large cards is you can shoot all day and if something
    > happens you lose all your files. I had a 2GB lexar 80x give me some
    > strange error when my 1D camera locked up on me once and I wanted to cry
    > because I had a 3/4 of a day of shooting on the card. As it turns out, I
    > got the images back, but now I'm considering using my old 1GB cards first
    > and save
    > the 2GB cards. I will not mind changing cards now.



    True, and I would go the 512 route if shooting nature. I shoot mostly
    models, and it would interrupt the spontanaity of the photoshoot if I had
    to keep switching memory cards. I love having the 2GB and shooting all I
    want.
     
    Proteus, Aug 11, 2005
    #4
  5. Dave R knows who

    Dirty Harry Guest

    "Dave R knows who" <> wrote in message
    news:GdwKe.8560$p%...
    >
    > "Proteus" <> wrote in message
    > news:EWvKe.5338$...
    > > Dave R knows who wrote:
    > >
    > >> After $15 rebate.
    > >>
    > >> If you have a 300D this is probably good enough as the speed-rated
    > >> cards
    > >> are worthless on that cam. Probably the XT, too.

    > >
    > >
    > > Does not surprise me. I now use a 2GB CF card, own two other 512mb cards
    > > but
    > > never use them. Just as with computers, low memory cards will phase out

    as
    > > the need for memory increases for digital cameras.

    >
    > The problem with the large cards is you can shoot all day and if something
    > happens you lose all your files. I had a 2GB lexar 80x give me some

    strange
    > error when my 1D camera locked up on me once and I wanted to cry because I
    > had a 3/4 of a day of shooting on the card. As it turns out, I got the
    > images back, but now I'm considering using my old 1GB cards first and save
    > the 2GB cards. I will not mind changing cards now.



    Yea I'm of the same clan. If you can fit over 50 images on a 512 card its
    no worse then shooting 36 exposure rolls of film and if the card does die
    you didn't loose your whole shoot.
     
    Dirty Harry, Aug 11, 2005
    #5
  6. Dave R knows who

    DHB Guest

    On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 07:32:56 GMT, "Dirty Harry" <>
    wrote:

    >
    >"Dave R knows who" <> wrote in message
    >news:GdwKe.8560$p%...
    >>
    >> "Proteus" <> wrote in message
    >> news:EWvKe.5338$...
    >> > Dave R knows who wrote:
    >> >
    >> >> After $15 rebate.
    >> >>
    >> >> If you have a 300D this is probably good enough as the speed-rated
    >> >> cards
    >> >> are worthless on that cam. Probably the XT, too.
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > Does not surprise me. I now use a 2GB CF card, own two other 512mb cards
    >> > but
    >> > never use them. Just as with computers, low memory cards will phase out

    >as
    >> > the need for memory increases for digital cameras.

    >>
    >> The problem with the large cards is you can shoot all day and if something
    >> happens you lose all your files. I had a 2GB lexar 80x give me some

    >strange
    >> error when my 1D camera locked up on me once and I wanted to cry because I
    >> had a 3/4 of a day of shooting on the card. As it turns out, I got the
    >> images back, but now I'm considering using my old 1GB cards first and save
    >> the 2GB cards. I will not mind changing cards now.

    >
    >
    >Yea I'm of the same clan. If you can fit over 50 images on a 512 card its
    >no worse then shooting 36 exposure rolls of film and if the card does die
    >you didn't loose your whole shoot.
    >

    Dirty Harry,
    It's been suggested before that even with a relatively
    large memory card 1 can always swap it out "before" it's full to
    minimize the risk of losing a days efforts if it fails.

    For example, if your doing a photo shoot of XYZ with a 2GB
    card, change the card about 1/2 way through the photo shoot with a 2nd
    2GB card. Now if the contents of 1 card becomes unrecoverable, you
    have lost only 1/2 of your efforts for that session. When you move on
    to the next photo event go back to the 1st card & again swap the card
    out @ about the 1/2 way point.

    Worst case scenario, if a 2BG card fails you loose only 1/2 of
    every photo event you took that day before you had a chance to
    off-load the pictures. However by using a large card you leave open
    the option to continue if you feel that events are unfolding too fast
    & that changing cards would mean missing some of the action. All of
    this is a judgment call & the cards can be swapped out at any point
    you choose 1/8th, 1/4 of the way through a photo session it's your
    choice, but I like the "option" to continue shooting if I feel that
    the risk to benefit ratio is in my favor.

    Smaller cards force you to remember to swap them out but might
    also happen @ a very bad point relative to what pictures your trying
    to capture.

    As for me, I now tend to favor the 2GB cards because they are
    often very cost competitive with smaller cards & permit me the option
    to keep shooting if I feel the risk is warranted. A last point in
    favor of larger cards is looking toward the future, a larger card may
    still be usable with a newer higher megapixel camera but a smaller 1
    may suddenly seem unrealistically small. Yes I know, @ that point
    memory is likely to be even less costly so upgrading to a larger card
    when needed may be no big deal. My only point here is, if the price
    per unit storage of the larger card is competitive with a smaller 1,
    it may be better to go with the larger 1 & simply use it differently
    as I have described/suggested.

    Just my opinion, it works well for me, so I thought I would
    share the idea with other's for their consideration.

    Best wishes to all, if you find a method that works for you,
    stick with it unless or until something better "for you" comes along.

    Respectfully, DHB

    ..


    "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
    or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
    is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
    to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
     
    DHB, Aug 11, 2005
    #6
  7. "DHB" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    >>> The problem with the large cards is you can shoot all day and if
    >>> something
    >>> happens you lose all your files. I had a 2GB lexar 80x give me some

    >>strange
    >>> error when my 1D camera locked up on me once and I wanted to cry because
    >>> I
    >>> had a 3/4 of a day of shooting on the card. As it turns out, I got the
    >>> images back, but now I'm considering using my old 1GB cards first and
    >>> save
    >>> the 2GB cards. I will not mind changing cards now.

    >>
    >>
    >>Yea I'm of the same clan. If you can fit over 50 images on a 512 card its
    >>no worse then shooting 36 exposure rolls of film and if the card does die
    >>you didn't loose your whole shoot.
    >>

    > Dirty Harry,
    > It's been suggested before that even with a relatively
    > large memory card 1 can always swap it out "before" it's full to
    > minimize the risk of losing a days efforts if it fails.
    >
    > For example, if your doing a photo shoot of XYZ with a 2GB
    > card, change the card about 1/2 way through the photo shoot with a 2nd
    > 2GB card. Now if the contents of 1 card becomes unrecoverable, you
    > have lost only 1/2 of your efforts for that session. When you move on
    > to the next photo event go back to the 1st card & again swap the card
    > out @ about the 1/2 way point.
    >
    > Worst case scenario, if a 2BG card fails you loose only 1/2 of
    > every photo event you took that day before you had a chance to
    > off-load the pictures. However by using a large card you leave open
    > the option to continue if you feel that events are unfolding too fast
    > & that changing cards would mean missing some of the action. All of
    > this is a judgment call & the cards can be swapped out at any point
    > you choose 1/8th, 1/4 of the way through a photo session it's your
    > choice, but I like the "option" to continue shooting if I feel that
    > the risk to benefit ratio is in my favor.
    >
    > Smaller cards force you to remember to swap them out but might
    > also happen @ a very bad point relative to what pictures your trying
    > to capture.
    >
    > As for me, I now tend to favor the 2GB cards because they are
    > often very cost competitive with smaller cards & permit me the option
    > to keep shooting if I feel the risk is warranted. A last point in
    > favor of larger cards is looking toward the future, a larger card may
    > still be usable with a newer higher megapixel camera but a smaller 1
    > may suddenly seem unrealistically small. Yes I know, @ that point
    > memory is likely to be even less costly so upgrading to a larger card
    > when needed may be no big deal. My only point here is, if the price
    > per unit storage of the larger card is competitive with a smaller 1,
    > it may be better to go with the larger 1 & simply use it differently
    > as I have described/suggested.
    >
    > Just my opinion, it works well for me, so I thought I would
    > share the idea with other's for their consideration.
    >
    > Best wishes to all, if you find a method that works for you,
    > stick with it unless or until something better "for you" comes along.


    Great point. Also, I don't know if it is the same for everyone, but most of
    my errors occur when the card is almost full so I think changing before full
    is a great idea.
     
    Dave R knows who, Aug 11, 2005
    #7
  8. Dave R knows who

    Neil Maxwell Guest

    On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 13:42:04 GMT, DHB <> wrote:

    > It's been suggested before that even with a relatively
    >large memory card 1 can always swap it out "before" it's full to
    >minimize the risk of losing a days efforts if it fails.


    A more effective way of hedging your bets is to carry a small HD or
    CDR based backup system. I have both, and the HD systems are faster
    and smaller, while the CDR backups aren't at risk if the electronics
    fail.

    With the CDR system, I shoot on 512M cards, since they fit easily on
    one CD. It will span across multiple CDRs, but it's another bit of
    fiddling to pay attention to. With a HD or 512Ms on a CDR, it's a
    matter of pushing a couple of buttons.

    Both add some bulk and fussing, but if the shots are really important,
    they add a big increase in risk control, as it would require 2
    failures to lose your pictures, instead of 1. Whether that's worth
    carrying the extra gear is another question.


    --
    Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer
     
    Neil Maxwell, Aug 11, 2005
    #8
  9. "Neil Maxwell" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 13:42:04 GMT, DHB <> wrote:
    >
    >> It's been suggested before that even with a relatively
    >>large memory card 1 can always swap it out "before" it's full to
    >>minimize the risk of losing a days efforts if it fails.

    >
    > A more effective way of hedging your bets is to carry a small HD or
    > CDR based backup system. I have both, and the HD systems are faster
    > and smaller, while the CDR backups aren't at risk if the electronics
    > fail.
    >
    > With the CDR system, I shoot on 512M cards, since they fit easily on
    > one CD. It will span across multiple CDRs, but it's another bit of
    > fiddling to pay attention to. With a HD or 512Ms on a CDR, it's a
    > matter of pushing a couple of buttons.
    >
    > Both add some bulk and fussing, but if the shots are really important,
    > they add a big increase in risk control, as it would require 2
    > failures to lose your pictures, instead of 1. Whether that's worth
    > carrying the extra gear is another question.
    >


    I would love to get the Epson P-2000 for reading the card right after it
    comes out of the camera. I would feel better knowing 1) the data is good,
    and 2) the data is in two places.
     
    Dave R knows who, Aug 11, 2005
    #9
  10. Dave R knows who

    Jer Guest

    Neil Maxwell wrote:
    > On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 13:42:04 GMT, DHB <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >> It's been suggested before that even with a relatively
    >>large memory card 1 can always swap it out "before" it's full to
    >>minimize the risk of losing a days efforts if it fails.

    >
    >
    > A more effective way of hedging your bets is to carry a small HD or
    > CDR based backup system. I have both, and the HD systems are faster
    > and smaller, while the CDR backups aren't at risk if the electronics
    > fail.
    >
    > With the CDR system, I shoot on 512M cards, since they fit easily on
    > one CD. It will span across multiple CDRs, but it's another bit of
    > fiddling to pay attention to. With a HD or 512Ms on a CDR, it's a
    > matter of pushing a couple of buttons.
    >
    > Both add some bulk and fussing, but if the shots are really important,
    > they add a big increase in risk control, as it would require 2
    > failures to lose your pictures, instead of 1. Whether that's worth
    > carrying the extra gear is another question.
    >
    >
    > --
    > Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer



    Neil, you make a good point about using a secondary system for an image
    store. I've dome some window shopping and have begun wondering if these
    verious units just do a simple copy from the card, or there a model that
    uses some sort of error checking during the copy process or maybe some
    sort of follow-up copy verification that ensures the copied image is
    valid. I realize this additional work may slow things a bit, but then
    again, I'm in no rush.

    Anybody with an idea about this?

    --
    jer
    email reply - I am not a 'ten'
     
    Jer, Aug 12, 2005
    #10
  11. Dave R knows who

    DHB Guest

    On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 20:01:28 -0500, Jer <> wrote:

    >Neil Maxwell wrote:
    >>>

    >> A more effective way of hedging your bets is to carry a small HD or
    >> CDR based backup system. I have both, and the HD systems are faster
    >> and smaller, while the CDR backups aren't at risk if the electronics
    >> fail.
    >>
    >> With the CDR system, I shoot on 512M cards, since they fit easily on
    >> one CD. It will span across multiple CDRs, but it's another bit of
    >> fiddling to pay attention to. With a HD or 512Ms on a CDR, it's a
    >> matter of pushing a couple of buttons.
    >>
    >> Both add some bulk and fussing, but if the shots are really important,
    >> they add a big increase in risk control, as it would require 2
    >> failures to lose your pictures, instead of 1. Whether that's worth
    >> carrying the extra gear is another question.
    >>
    >>
    >> --
    >> Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer

    >
    >


    >Neil, you make a good point about using a secondary system for an image
    >store. I've dome some window shopping and have begun wondering if these
    >verious units just do a simple copy from the card, or there a model that
    >uses some sort of error checking during the copy process or maybe some
    >sort of follow-up copy verification that ensures the copied image is
    >valid. I realize this additional work may slow things a bit, but then
    >again, I'm in no rush.
    >
    >Anybody with an idea about this?


    Transferring DATA (pictures in this case) is rarely ever done
    with true 100% error checking. I know of no consumer or pro-consumer
    level P&S or DSLR that does this when transferring picture DATA from
    the camera's buffer to the memory flash card.

    If this is correct then that's the 1st place DATA could be
    corrupted. As far as I know this also applies to almost "any" device
    that you use to transfer your data to in the field.

    For example, transfer to CD-R or DVD-ROM via a device
    specifically designed for this, it must 1st read the data from your
    camera's flash memory card & then burn it onto CD-R or DVD-ROM. Most
    if not all of these units have some RAM memory used as a buffer for
    which "all" of your picture DATA must go through before reaching it's
    optical output disc. This RAM is almost certainly not (ECC) Error
    Checking & Correcting.

    How do you know the CD or DVD it burned actually works & now
    holds all of your DATA error free before reusing, thus writing over
    your DATA (pictures) on your camera's memory card? All of these same
    concerns/places where your DATA can be corrupted also apply to units
    that write the DATA to a 2.5" hard drive.

    As for the Epson (P2000?) that somebody suggested, yes you can
    view it 1st but that's not likely practical during a photo shoot.
    Also Does the Epson P2000 support all RAW formats so you can view them
    or does it just display the small jpeg that many cameras create (when
    set to record RAW only files) for the camera's LCD to display?

    Even a notebook PC has the same "potential" weaknesses. With
    a notebook PC you can install your RAW conversion software to view &
    be sure the pictures are there & also burn a CD-R or DVD-ROM so that
    your eggs are not all in 1 basket.

    Does your home PC use/have ECC RAM memory? Very few do these
    days because of the added cost & the fact that RAM has become so
    reliable. The same can be asked about the RAM buffer on your hard
    drive, do you think that's ECC RAM?

    Last question, how much do you want/can take with you on a
    photo shoot? As for me, I try to not overwrite my camera flash cards
    until I am certain that I have saved the DATA properly on @ least 2
    places & always update my off-site storage as often as I can too.

    Basically, take reasonable precautions with your DATA, what is
    reasonable to me may be seen as too elaborate or not enough for
    others.

    Hope some of this is helpful to somebody.

    Respectfully, DHB

    ..
    "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
    or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
    is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
    to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
     
    DHB, Aug 12, 2005
    #11
  12. Dave R knows who

    Neil Maxwell Guest

    Stacking replies because my server drops some posts...

    On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 05:35:08 GMT, DHB <> wrote:

    >On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 20:01:28 -0500, Jer <> wrote:
    >
    >>Neil, you make a good point about using a secondary system for an image
    >>store. I've dome some window shopping and have begun wondering if these
    >>verious units just do a simple copy from the card, or there a model that
    >>uses some sort of error checking during the copy process or maybe some
    >>sort of follow-up copy verification that ensures the copied image is
    >>valid. I realize this additional work may slow things a bit, but then
    >>again, I'm in no rush.


    There are backup CDR systems that will perform a compare after the
    burn, and they do add extra time, but they do improve the odds of good
    data integrity. I don't recall which ones they are, as I quit
    researching them after buying my last one, but a bit of research will
    dig them up. There are others that let you view the pictures, but
    they have shorter battery life, and it's not as good a guarantee as a
    compare.

    The photo review websites, like http://www.steves-digicams.com/ and
    www.dpreview.com, often have discussions or reviews on these, or you
    could start a new thread on it here.

    Note that CDRs do not necessarily have long or guaranteed lifetimes,
    despite what the marketers say, and leaving a burned one out in the
    sun for a few hours can be enough to make it unreadable. This is
    another advantage of HD over CDR, but with the HD, if you drop it, you
    may lose all your data at once, while burned CDRs are not dependent on
    the device once they're finished.

    If you're really paranoid, or the data is particularly valuable and
    irreplaceable, you have one of each, since each system is susceptible
    to different types of failures. I mostly use the CDR system, and burn
    2 copies of each card on separate CDRs, and I've never had an
    unrecoverable photo in the last 2-3 years of using this system. If
    you're on the road, you can mail one to yourself at home, which will
    protect you if your luggage/gear gets stolen, or whatever.

    As DHB says, we all decide what are reasonable precautions, and they
    must be traded off against cost and difficulty.

    > How do you know the CD or DVD it burned actually works & now
    >holds all of your DATA error free before reusing, thus writing over
    >your DATA (pictures) on your camera's memory card? All of these same
    >concerns/places where your DATA can be corrupted also apply to units
    >that write the DATA to a 2.5" hard drive.


    These are all good points, and ultimately, none of your data is safe.
    It's all about risk analysis, and how much time/money/trouble you want
    to use to safeguard your data. We all have different thresholds for
    this.

    I research a new device before I buy it. If a fair number of people
    have used it successfully and only a few have had problems, that's a
    good sign. If it's the other way around, I keep looking.

    When I get a new backup device, I test it a bunch of times before
    taking it out on the road. If I can back up my data 20 times over a
    week to HD or CDR and read them back without error every time on
    multiple computers, this helps reassure me that the system is working
    as designed, but any device can fail at any time.

    As far as the original data integrity goes, that's also a concern, but
    if your camera is not writing properly to the card, it's a whole
    different issue solved a different way. I work on the assumption that
    my camera and cards have worked fine many times in the past.
    Regardless, the goal is to back up the data your camera has put on the
    card, and that's the first step.


    --
    Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer
     
    Neil Maxwell, Aug 12, 2005
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. JohnF

    Problem with ECS 741GX Mobo boot, Fry's system

    JohnF, Jan 6, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    1,115
    Blinky the Shark
    Jan 8, 2005
  2. Jason O'Rourke

    10D for $1349 at Outpost (Fry's)

    Jason O'Rourke, Aug 9, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    340
    Ralph Kramden
    Aug 11, 2003
  3. Paul

    canon 420ex flash at Fry's

    Paul, Oct 20, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    568
    Dave Herzstein
    Oct 23, 2003
  4. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    669
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,158
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page