I Gb compact flash vs 512Mb (or even 256) compact flash

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Rick S., Sep 9, 2004.

  1. Rick S.

    Rick S. Guest

    I see I can get a 1 Gb compactflash card for 20 or 30 bucks more than
    a 512 Mb card.... seems a no brainer to me, I'd like to get a coupla 1
    G's rather than 4 512's, (I'm going on a long trip and will not have
    any downloading capability).
    Is there any reason I should avoid such a big capacity card?
    Is it the same technology in both?
    Any body have any failures on gigabyte cards?
    I'm going to stick with established namebrands, either sandisk or
    lexar, and my camera can handle the size.
    thanks ahead of time for any input,
    Rick S., Sep 9, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Rick S.

    Charlie Self Guest

    Rick S asks:
    Loss? If you lose a card, you lose a lot more photos with the big ones. I've
    never lost a card, but I have misplaced a couple for several weeks. Very

    Charlie Self
    "Men stumble over the truth from time to time, but most pick themselves up and
    hurry off as if nothing happened." Sir Winston Churchill
    Charlie Self, Sep 9, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. OK....where could a person go for a long trip where they could not empty
    their card...but where they can recharge batteries and eat and all that
    other stuff.

    A long camping trip...might be....you can charge with solar panels.

    But, mostly....you can get a CD burned anywhere.
    Gene Palmiter, Sep 9, 2004
  4. Rick S.

    YoYo Guest

    I stuck to the 512mb size because it
    fits on a CD

    in message
    card for 20 or 30 bucks more than
    to me, I'd like to get a coupla 1
    YoYo, Sep 9, 2004
  5. Rick S.

    Ken Tough Guest

    Really? I can think of a lot of places where CD burning is a bit
    of a mission. As you get outside Namerica (esp in rural areas),
    the capabilities will drop drastically, and prices could be steep.
    Ken Tough, Sep 9, 2004
  6. Rick S.

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Theoretically, you are more likely to suffer a single failure if you
    have 4 cards than if you have one card. However, in practical use,
    there is very little chance of a problem with any one card. The reason
    many people choose to use smaller cards is that if one of them dies, or
    just gets lost or damaged, then the potential for loss is less. I would
    rate the chance of loss as the highest probablity, with damage second,
    and an actual card failure as least likely.
    You pays your money, and you takes your chances...
    Ron Hunter, Sep 9, 2004
  7. Rick S.

    grim Guest

    If he's hiking, he wouldn't want to pack a solar charger in his backpack.
    Space is too much at a premium. A couple sets of non-rechargable lithium
    batteries should provide plenty of juice (if his camera uses AAs). If he has
    to use recharagables, bring along 3 or 4 batteries. He should be able to
    shoot over a thousand pictures.
    Frankly, there are areas in the world where I would not trust handing over
    *anything* the least bit expensive (like a CF card) to someone for them to
    burn a CD. Many locals are just waiting to rip-off western tourists. The
    local cops are in on it, too. Everything is corruption and scams in these
    places. Keep your valuables close and hidden, and your wits about you.
    (Hey... sounds like good advice for New York as well! lol)
    grim, Sep 9, 2004
  8. My concern is with the tiny pins in the CF connector. I've seen too many
    bent pins (admittedly in other, but similar, types of connector) to be able
    to pop CF cards in and out of sockets and cameras and PC adapters blithly.

    I buy the biggest card I can afford and never take it out of the camera.
    Sure, download takes an age, but one has to eat and sleep, and it can be
    overlapped with one of those.

    David J. Littleboy

    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Sep 9, 2004
  9. That is correct.
    Wow, David! I thought my card was slow....Usually making coffee does
    it... but I am of the same persuasion- generally d/l it from the camera
    for the same reasons. Besides, if I break the plug on the camera, I can
    still revert to an external card reader, but the reverse is not true.

    And even though a card reader is twice as fast, it just ain't anywhere
    near fast. So, I don't see much practical difference if the task takes 5
    minutes vs. 10, or 15 vs. 7.5. OF COURSE, there will be times when those
    differences are important.....
    John McWilliams, Sep 9, 2004
  10. Rick S.

    Ron Hunter Guest

    The pins are deep within the camera. If the card slot is properly
    designed, there can't be a misalignment when inserting the card.
    Contamination of the card slot is a remote posibility if reasonable care
    is exercised. Of course if you operate in hostile environments, you are
    probably doing a wise thing.
    Ron Hunter, Sep 10, 2004
  11. Rick S.

    Juergen Guest

  12. Rick S.

    Paul J Gans Guest

    My wife is going to the Antarctic this December. Anyone
    know of a place where she can burn a CD?

    With all those penguins you'd think that some of them would
    be running Linux...

    ----- Paul J. Gans
    Paul J Gans, Sep 10, 2004
  13. Rick S.

    Paul J Gans Guest

    Nah. We have pseudo camera stores on every corner in midtown.
    All sorts of exotic out-of-date stuff at higher than list

    We steal legally.

    ----- Paul J. Gans
    Paul J Gans, Sep 10, 2004
  14. Rick S.

    zeitgeist Guest

    I prefer 512 cards at the moment, I can fill it up then copy it over to one
    folder on my laptop, then drag and drop that folder onto my CD drive and
    burn a backup.

    now with a 1gb or larger card I would have to stop and select so many
    images, then wait for that cd to burn, then copy over the balance of the

    so while its easier to shoot more on one card for less money per mb, its
    more efficient for me to get the rest of the work flow going.

    Now my kodak only puts about 32 images on a 512 so, while that's not that
    much different than shooting film (30 on my 645 with 220, 36 on the nikon)

    when I see the 2gb cards come down in price I'll get a DVD drive.
    zeitgeist, Sep 10, 2004
  15. Rick S.

    zeitgeist Guest

    I would imagine that those researchers would be the most computer literate
    folks of any.
    zeitgeist, Sep 10, 2004
  16. Rick S.

    WMAS 1960 Guest

    Haven't read all the replies so this may have been mentioned. There are
    probably a few concerns to your question. What format do you take your
    pictures in and for what purpose do you shoot? Some photographers do work
    where RAW files are necessary and more preferred and they take more room, as I
    understand. Then there is, how big is your average shoot or project? If the
    combination of these two answers leads you to large files or large quantities
    of pictures, large cards could be convenient as they would minimize the time
    transferring material or changing cards. Personally I don't take such
    demanding pictures and jpgs are my preferred format. Also my largest batches
    of photos are around 170 or 200 shots. Thus a couple 256s are handy. I do
    have a 512 but for some of the concerns mentioned below, I prefer the 2-256s
    over one 512. Unless I know I am going to take a large number of photos and
    don't want to have to change cards. Something that I might anticipate will be
    a fast action or long running event.

    One example of where the small numerous cards was a nuissnace was a Hockey
    Tournement that I shot last fall. This is really unusual for me to do such an
    ambitious project but I shot 700 photos of 8 games in one afternoon and
    evening. I had 4 256 and 1 512 cards. Mid way through the tournement I had to
    miss about half of one game due to having to transfer all my photos onto my
    notebook. Took over an hour to do all the cards I had used.

    Also, the shots missed while fumbling and changing cards was an issue. However
    for most of my average shoots, like this afternoon at a Preschool where I
    photographed a Kindergarten class, I took about 20 shots. That was a little
    light of normal but I can usually do with one or two of my 256 cards.

    There are a couple advantages here with the 256s. First, by dividing up
    projects on multiple cards, if you do have a failure or loose one of the cards
    you don't loose your entire project. Second if you have multiple smaller
    cards in your bag and one fails, you aren't stuck without a card. One instance
    like this that I recall was when I was driving around and had my camera with
    me. I came accross a fully involved car fire and the fire department hadn't
    responded yet. I navigated my way to the other side of the expressway and when
    I got there pulled out my camera to pop off a few shots of the firefighters
    hitting the flames with their extinguishers and hoses. The steam and thick
    black and white smoke was very dramatic. I went to take the shot and found I
    didn't have a memory card in the camera. My stomach sunk to my ankles. I
    couldn't imagine a similar situation where your only card is defective.

    Lastly there is an issue of work efficiency and the time it takes to transfer
    your materials. I suppose it is somewhat relative as a 512meg card with 256
    meg would probably transfer in the same time as the 256 card but I find the
    smaller batches of the smaller cards works a little better for me. Certainly, I
    wouldn't think of the 1Gig or higher. Since I archive a lot on CD-R, a 1Gig
    card can't be fit onto 1 CD. however 2 or 2+ 256 cards can be put on one CD.
    A 512 card can also be put 1 for 1 on a CD. The Gig or higher cards would
    require some dividing of contents which is something I prefer not to be
    bothered with.

    Then, just thinking of it. The thought of loosing a (just looking at BH Photo
    right now. Wasn't aware that for about $2,300 you could get an 8gig card),
    $500 or $700 card compared to a 1Gig or less card worth $125 or less might be a
    consideration. I would be sick if I lost an $800 or $2300 card. Also, if you
    accidently lost a 256 or 512 meg card you might be able to get another pretty
    easilly at Target, Office Max. Walmart, Best Buy.... At $125 for a 1Gig card
    you might find them easilly enough. However, for a 4 gig or 8 gig card you
    might be more limited in your ability to find them in a pinch.
    WMAS 1960, Sep 10, 2004
  17. Rick S.

    WMAS 1960 Guest

    But, mostly....you can get a CD burned anywhere.


    I did that during a trip to Las Vegas. At the time I had my Coolpix 990 and
    had accidentally forgotten to lower the resolution after shooting some stuff at
    the full 3mpxls. Usually I would shoot my vacation stuff at 1024x768 to get
    the most bang out of my cards. Well, I was surprised when I realized that I
    was almost out of memory the second day in town. I had one card left and 3 and
    a half more days to go. I went to a photo shop in The Venetian and had the
    stuff on the used cards put on a CD so I COULD, if I had to, reuse the cards.
    Every night I would go back to the hotel room and go through all my pictures.
    I would make some serious value judgement of whether I wanted to save certain
    pictures or not. It is a good thing I did this. As it turned out, I didn't
    have to reuse the other cards. I made it through the trip by conserving the
    cards I had. When I got home I put the CD into my computer and it wouldn't
    read. Had I recylced those cards some of my best stuff would have been
    history. There was obvuiously an incompatability with the software that they
    used at the photo place and what I had on my computer. It cost me about 20
    bucks too for a worthless disc.

    I would suggest that one should NOT rely on those CD duplication services. It
    might not be a bad idea to have it done as a backup but if you can, take as
    much memory as you can afford to take. Actually the disc wasn't a total loss
    because 2 years later when I bought a new computer the new machine could read
    the disc. However, at the time I would have been sick.
    WMAS 1960, Sep 10, 2004
  18. Rick S.

    Ken Tough Guest

    Fantastic! Wow, lucky. I'd say she ought to bring a laptop
    along and burn it herself.
    In the land of the midnight Sun? I doubt it!
    Ken Tough, Sep 10, 2004
  19. According to http://counter.li.org/reports/arearank.php , there
    are (at least) 3 Linux users in Antartica, making it one of
    the most Linux-friendly region in the world... (using density
    to measure friendliness)
    Loris Renggli, Sep 10, 2004
  20. Rick S.

    Savidge4 Guest

    Savidge4, Sep 10, 2004
    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.