Canon moves to SD from CF for Canon S2 IS

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Siddhartha Jain, Jun 22, 2005.

  1. But Li-ion batteries are not so standardised - that's what I'm asking for:

    - one battery which will fit many cameras, and from different

    - an end to excessive prices for special-to-type batteries

    - an end to very poor quality 3rd party imports

    - wide availability of the high street

    - wide availability of a non-rechargeable equivalent

    David J Taylor, Jun 23, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. Siddhartha Jain

    David Harmon Guest

    On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 02:35:43 GMT in, Jerome Bigge
    On a recent visit to Sav-on, the SD slots were taped over on 2 out
    of 3 of their customer terminals. Apparently, according to the woman
    working there, if a customer inserts the SD card upside down and
    pushes HARD ENOUGH it is still possible to break something.
    David Harmon, Jun 23, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. Siddhartha Jain

    Bill Funk Guest

    Sure. And let's standardize lenses, too. Why do we need so many?
    And sensor size, too. It's too confusing as is, and I don't need all
    those other sizes.
    Gee, let's just have one camera on the market. It'll be good, because
    it will be standardizes!
    And here I was under the impression that a monopoly was not going to
    result in lower prices. Unless the Government has that monopoly, of
    course, so I guess the Government should make that one size battery,
    Well, the monopoly will solve that.
    Of course!
    No, that doesn't fit the standard. Sorry.
    Standards sound teriffic, until you stop to think of the uninted
    Who gets to set the standards?
    I'd really rather have both - and + DVDs, instead of a "Standardized"
    format that won't change or evolve.
    Let the market figure it out.

    My opinion, of course. :)
    Bill Funk, Jun 23, 2005
  4. Siddhartha Jain

    Bill Funk Guest

    Sorry. I have no SD cards.
    The springs are prevented from bending, how?
    Bill Funk, Jun 23, 2005
  5. Siddhartha Jain

    Bill Funk Guest

    Maybe they put in more "stuff" that wouldn't fit with the CF card?
    Like a larger battery? LArger sensor (i don't know)? Bigger PCB?
    Or did they make a hollow floatation chamber? :)

    Maybe by using SD, they still kept it smaller than if they used CF?
    Bill Funk, Jun 23, 2005
  6. Siddhartha Jain

    SleeperMan Guest

    This is always possible. For example, you can smash every card with
    sufficiently big hammer, and other thing, imagine what will happen if you
    let the cow to enter in china shop...and you can have top quality most
    expensive china available, it won't help a bit...
    All this is comparable only within normal limits, i.e. when you assume that
    cards are used correctly. Note that in every equipment you buy always says
    RTFM BEFORE USE!!!!!!!
    SleeperMan, Jun 23, 2005
  7. Standardised lenses in the form of lenses with interchangeable mounts were
    once available - perhaps they still are. I'm sure they provided an
    economical solution for those who couldn't afford manufacturer's own

    I don't think your comparison is fair. We already have standardised
    non-rechargeables and NiMH cells in the form of AAA, AA etc. sizes. I
    don't see what is wrong with wanting a similar range of standardised
    Li-ion cells. It's already clear that many people are turning away from
    cameras with proprietary Li-ion batteries, so it actually might be in the
    manufacturers' interest to adopt a common set of sizes.

    David J Taylor, Jun 23, 2005
  8. Siddhartha Jain

    ASAAR Guest

    That's a worthy goal, but one that you're unlikely to see, unless
    .. . . you or someone else finds some means of providing to the
    camera manufacturer's two of Li-ion's benefits:

    1. If a second battery is needed by the new camera buyer, they're
    much more likely to purchase the much more expensive ones with the
    manufacturer's label on them than the much cheaper third party
    replacements. Standardization would lower prices even further, and
    buyers would be much more trusting of known brands (Energizer,
    RayOVac, etc.) than the more obscure brands such as Power2000, Moon
    Flower, etc., unlikely to be seen in drug stores and supermarkets.

    2. By continually designing new proprietary batteries that can't be
    used in older, discontinued models, you get a powerful "planned
    obsolescence" tool that encourages consumers to buy new cameras
    sooner than they might otherwise have done.

    I'd also like to see Li-ion rechargeable batteries standardized,
    but at the same time, it would be desirable to either develop
    primary Lithium batteries that could be used in place of the Li-ion
    rechargeables, or allow the use of AA batteries. (There are some
    cameras and PDAs that allow the choice of either Li-ion
    rechargeables or alkalines, so it can be done.) The reason is that
    rechargeable Li-ion batteries (at least the ones I've used), while
    better than alkaline batteries in cold weather, still fare poorly.
    They are rated for operation only down to +14 deg. F, and even if
    stored but not used, aren't supposed to be subjected to temperatures
    below -4 deg. F. Compare that with AA Lithiums that are rated for
    operation down to temperatures as low as -40 degrees. It's
    interesting that you asked for a non-rechargeable equivalent. I
    agree, but as noted above, unless some improved technology comes
    along, I'd like to see it done with both alkalines (cheap, and
    excellent shelf life) and Lithiums (best performance and even better
    shelf life).
    ASAAR, Jun 23, 2005
  9. Thanks for your comments. I think that in regard to (1) you may have to
    accept a slight increase in camera prices if net profit margin is to be
    maintained. There will be a slight saving in not having to deal with the
    specification, procurement and QC of special-to-type cells. I think that
    (2) is the opposite - people will be /discouraged/ from buying new models
    that don't use the older batteries - it certainly did me!

    Yes, I want primary cells in the same form factor with electrical
    equivalence, and if both alkalines and Lithium are required so be it. I
    wonder what a modern version of the PP3 could do? The right sort of
    capacity? Need better contacts, though!

    David J Taylor, Jun 23, 2005
  10. Siddhartha Jain

    missingdata Guest

    With SD, by design, the leaf springs are pushed outside of the volume
    of the chamber by the card itself.

    Think of it this way: if you make a piece of solid plastic the size of
    an SD card and push it in an SD slot, it won't hurt the springs, as
    they simply move out of the way of the phony card as though they were
    making contact with surface pads on a real card.

    If you make a piece of solid plastic the size of a CF card and push it
    in a CF slot, it will smash all the socket pins [if you press hard
    enough], as they are not intended to get out of the way of the card,
    but rather to mate with something inside the card.

    Bottom line, if it fits in an SD slot, it's unlikely to damage the
    hardware. The same cannot be said for CF.
    missingdata, Jun 23, 2005
  11. Siddhartha Jain

    Bill Funk Guest

    Those aren't standardized lenses, they're lenses with standardized
    mounts. We have them now. And not all lenses with, for example, Canon
    mounts are from Canon.
    The market doesn't seem to be suffering as you think it is.
    Canon, for example, is making the Digital Rebel XT/350D in larger
    initial numbers than the DR/300D (which had production ramped up =due
    to demand), even with a proprietary battery.
    Nikon's D70 and other DSLRs, in fact, all major brand DSLRs are
    selling in more numbers than initially expected.
    A few people deciding they will do without for lack of standardized
    batteries aren't hurting the makers much.
    Bill Funk, Jun 23, 2005
  12. Siddhartha Jain

    Bill Funk Guest

    And if debris gets in the slot, what happens?
    How does CF fail in this regard?
    Like I said, I have some devices that accept CF,and aside from debris
    getting in the slot, I see no way for normal insertion to bend any
    Abnormal use (abuse) can break anything.
    Bill Funk, Jun 23, 2005
  13. You obvously have never seen the Canon S1 IS and S2 IS in person. While the
    S2 IS is a bit bigger overall when closed than the S1 IS, that biggness is
    mostly in the 12X zoom lens assembly when it deploys. No Viagra required
    here. The S2 IS lens is a lot bigger than the S1 IS.

    Both the S1 IS and S2 IS use the exact same batteries - 4 AA cells.

    David Sommers, Jun 24, 2005
  14. Siddhartha Jain

    missingdata Guest

    Sorry, but I thought I was already as clear as possible:

    The design of the cavity and wiper contacts in SD is such that anything
    that fits though the opening of the cavity for an SD card cannot harm
    those contacts. It avoids common mis-insertion problems >BY DESIGN<.

    The design of the cavity and pins in CF is such that anything that fits
    through the opening of the cavity for a CF card CAN harm the pins
    except a CF card oriented the correct way. It does not avoid common
    mis-insertion problems by design.

    One easy way to damage one or more CF pins [and I have seen more than
    one camera damaged this way] is to put a CF card in sideways and push.

    Clear yet?
    missingdata, Jun 24, 2005
  15. Siddhartha Jain

    Bill Funk Guest

    It's getting better.
    But, when I try to insert a CF card sideways, it doesn't want to go.
    By design.
    Like I said, abuse can break anything.

    For SD, if you'd like to volunteer a device that takes SD cards, I
    will bet hard cash I can farkle it. :)
    Bill Funk, Jun 24, 2005
  16. Ohh yes, the battery are the same. Here's what makes it larger (from
    "Unlike most 'upgrades', the S2 IS is not only better specified than
    its predecessor; it's larger (much deeper) and heavier too. Most of
    this is down to the slightly larger sensor, which leads to a slightly
    larger lens (which also has a wider zoom range)"

    - Siddhartha
    Siddhartha Jain, Jun 24, 2005
  17. Variety is the prerequisite for evolution.

    Hans-Georg Michna, Jun 24, 2005
  18. Siddhartha Jain

    Rick Guest

    And corporate profit margins.

    There was absolutely no reason why Canon had to switch
    from CF to SD in the S2.
    Rick, Jun 24, 2005
  19. Siddhartha Jain

    Bill Funk Guest

    You are privy to Canon's design meetings?
    Or is this from your deep knowledge of everything about digital
    I'm curious why you would attempt to tell us that you know more than
    Canon's people do.
    Bill Funk, Jun 24, 2005
  20. Nothing is wrong with wanting standardized Li-Ion cells. In fact the
    cells are already available for manufacturers to build packs with. All
    the manufacturer of battery packs is doing is putting the Li-Ion cells
    into an enclosure, and adding appropriate circuitry for protection,
    temperature monitoring, etc.
    Where do you get the idea that many people are turning away from cameras
    with proprietary batteries? They really have no choice in most cases,
    since except for vertical grips that take AA batteries, most mid-range
    to high end cameras use proprietary Li-Ion packs.

    A standardized Li-Ion pack is already available, it's the R-CRV3, but it
    isn't a great solution.

    The biggest obstacle with Li-Ion is that you have to sell packs, not
    cells. The packs have the protection circuitry. As we have seen with
    Apple notebooks, Li-Ion batteries can catch fire or explode when charged
    Steven M. Scharf, Jun 24, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.