Sandisk Firewire no faster than Lexar Jumpshot

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Si, Dec 27, 2003.

  1. Si

    Si Guest

    I've just transferred 60 images from my D30 from a Lexar 128MB 12x Card to
    my 2400+ Athlon PC via a brand new Sandisk Imagemate Firewire Reader.

    It took a little over a minute. The same files via Lexar jumpshot took
    almost exactly the same amount of time....

    What gives?

    Si.
    Si, Dec 27, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Si

    y_p_w Guest

    Si wrote:

    > I've just transferred 60 images from my D30 from a Lexar 128MB 12x Card to
    > my 2400+ Athlon PC via a brand new Sandisk Imagemate Firewire Reader.
    >
    > It took a little over a minute. The same files via Lexar jumpshot took
    > almost exactly the same amount of time....
    >
    > What gives?


    I'm assuming the Lexar card reader is a standard USB (1.1) device.

    In that case, the card speed may be the limiting factor, and
    the Firewire speed advantage may be minimal.
    y_p_w, Dec 27, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On 2003-12-27, Si <> wrote:
    > I've just transferred 60 images from my D30 from a Lexar 128MB 12x Card to
    > my 2400+ Athlon PC via a brand new Sandisk Imagemate Firewire Reader.
    >
    > It took a little over a minute. The same files via Lexar jumpshot took
    > almost exactly the same amount of time....
    >
    > What gives?


    USB and USB 2.0 are attempts from Intel to make more money,
    not to deliver superior technology.

    In most cases 400 Mb/s FireWire is vastly superior to 480 Mb/s
    USB 2.0.

    But since USB is cheaper, it might win :( Just like there are sold
    more sub-$100 4Mpixel digicams than digicams that gives a good
    picture.
    Povl H. Pedersen, Dec 27, 2003
    #3
  4. Si

    Si Guest

    "Povl H. Pedersen" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On 2003-12-27, Si <> wrote:
    > > I've just transferred 60 images from my D30 from a Lexar 128MB 12x Card

    to
    > > my 2400+ Athlon PC via a brand new Sandisk Imagemate Firewire Reader.
    > >
    > > It took a little over a minute. The same files via Lexar jumpshot took
    > > almost exactly the same amount of time....
    > >
    > > What gives?

    >
    > USB and USB 2.0 are attempts from Intel to make more money,
    > not to deliver superior technology.
    >
    > In most cases 400 Mb/s FireWire is vastly superior to 480 Mb/s
    > USB 2.0.
    >
    > But since USB is cheaper, it might win :( Just like there are sold
    > more sub-$100 4Mpixel digicams than digicams that gives a good
    > picture.


    What does this have to do with my question?

    The new Firewire reader performed at exactly the same speed as my Lexar USB
    1.1 card reader...it was certainly no faster.

    So, I'm assuming that the lack of speed increase is in fact down to the
    speed of the card - sadly.

    Si
    Si, Dec 28, 2003
    #4
  5. Si

    Si Guest

    "y_p_w" <> wrote in message
    news:wUlHb.8275$...
    >
    >
    > Si wrote:
    >
    > > I've just transferred 60 images from my D30 from a Lexar 128MB 12x Card

    to
    > > my 2400+ Athlon PC via a brand new Sandisk Imagemate Firewire Reader.
    > >
    > > It took a little over a minute. The same files via Lexar jumpshot took
    > > almost exactly the same amount of time....
    > >
    > > What gives?

    >
    > I'm assuming the Lexar card reader is a standard USB (1.1) device.
    >
    > In that case, the card speed may be the limiting factor, and
    > the Firewire speed advantage may be minimal.
    >


    Yes, the Lexar Jumpshot is indeed only USB 1.1 (so I believe) and so you may
    be right in that it's the speed of the card that is the limiting factor.

    Sadly.

    Si.
    Si, Dec 28, 2003
    #5
  6. Si

    Si Guest

    "y_p_w" <> wrote in message
    news:wUlHb.8275$...
    >
    >
    > Si wrote:
    >
    > > I've just transferred 60 images from my D30 from a Lexar 128MB 12x Card

    to
    > > my 2400+ Athlon PC via a brand new Sandisk Imagemate Firewire Reader.
    > >
    > > It took a little over a minute. The same files via Lexar jumpshot took
    > > almost exactly the same amount of time....
    > >
    > > What gives?

    >
    > I'm assuming the Lexar card reader is a standard USB (1.1) device.
    >
    > In that case, the card speed may be the limiting factor, and
    > the Firewire speed advantage may be minimal.
    >


    Aha,

    I've just performed an experiment with 56MB of .jpg images.

    Downloading via the Win XP camera and scanner wizard took 1 minute and 36
    seconds with the jumpshot 1.1 reader.

    Downloading the same files with XP's camera and scanner wizard and the
    Sandisk FW reader took 1 minute and 8 seconds.

    However, opening up the folder containing the images and dragging them to a
    new folder on the desktop with the Sandisk reader took - wait for it....

    16 seconds!

    It seems that the problem lies with the camera and scanner wizard.

    Si.
    Si, Dec 28, 2003
    #6
    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. Alan F Cross
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    621
    Stuart Middleton-White
    Jul 15, 2003
  2. Edward Ripley-Duggan

    Problems with Lexar CompactFlash/Jumpshot

    Edward Ripley-Duggan, Dec 4, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    586
    Edward Ripley-Duggan
    Dec 5, 2003
  3. john chapman

    Jumpshot from Lexar

    john chapman, Feb 6, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    491
    Bob Niland
    Feb 6, 2004
  4. Jerry
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    623
    Jerry
    May 10, 2004
  5. Magnusfarce

    Faster Memory Card: Sandisk Ultra II or Lexar w WA ?

    Magnusfarce, Jun 14, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    663
    P.Schuman
    Jun 18, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page