Pixmania brand CF cards
Discussion
Hi,
Just on the verge of ordering my new camera and have been tempted by one of their deals (camera + case + spare battery + CF card).
Only snag is it's an "own brand" CF card - does anybody know if they are any good? Are they reasonably swift & reliable?
I am going to get a Canon S70 (7 megapixel) - is 512MB a big enough card? I am tempted to buy another "spare" as a backup, a 128MB or something. Will that cover a couple of weeks away?
Thanks :)
Just on the verge of ordering my new camera and have been tempted by one of their deals (camera + case + spare battery + CF card).
Only snag is it's an "own brand" CF card - does anybody know if they are any good? Are they reasonably swift & reliable?
I am going to get a Canon S70 (7 megapixel) - is 512MB a big enough card? I am tempted to buy another "spare" as a backup, a 128MB or something. Will that cover a couple of weeks away?
Thanks :)
With 7Mp you could be looking at 3Mb per picture, so a 512Mb card will hold 170 images. That's probably enogh for a day out, but not a holiday. I have 2 x 1Gb Lexar Pro cards for the D70, which is a 'mere' 6.1Mp.
The package you see includes the own-brand card, so it looks like you're stuck with it. You may as well get it and see what you think (not just size but speed) - slowest is 8x, with 1x being 150Kb/sec transfer rate.
If you don't like it, stick it on eBay and buy a branded, faster one you feel happier with.
The package you see includes the own-brand card, so it looks like you're stuck with it. You may as well get it and see what you think (not just size but speed) - slowest is 8x, with 1x being 150Kb/sec transfer rate.
If you don't like it, stick it on eBay and buy a branded, faster one you feel happier with.
With 7MP you're going to eat memory like nobody's business.
Take the card from the package and treat it like a spare / backup card. In the end it all comes down to the question of how much any lost images will cost / freak you out.
Personally I'd be gutted and so have always gone for Lexar and Sandisk CF cards. They might be bit more to initially buy than no brand / own brand but they have proven mega reliable by folk who give them a lot harder time than me.
As Simpo days look at the transfer speed aas well.
On the subject of how much memory you need, only you know how many photographs you tend to take per day/week. Whatever you do always make sure you have plenty of memory so that you don't get stuck having to back up and not be able to shoot and hence miss a picture.
Chris
Take the card from the package and treat it like a spare / backup card. In the end it all comes down to the question of how much any lost images will cost / freak you out.
Personally I'd be gutted and so have always gone for Lexar and Sandisk CF cards. They might be bit more to initially buy than no brand / own brand but they have proven mega reliable by folk who give them a lot harder time than me.
As Simpo days look at the transfer speed aas well.
On the subject of how much memory you need, only you know how many photographs you tend to take per day/week. Whatever you do always make sure you have plenty of memory so that you don't get stuck having to back up and not be able to shoot and hence miss a picture.
Chris
I would have to say the bigger the better... I find 1GB a comfortable size for my little Coolpix 4200, and I regret only getting a 1GB for my D70, although I always shoot in NEF... Now I'm looking to get a 4GB over the summer. At any rate, I really wouldn't consider anything less than a 1GB card for a 7MP camera.
roop said:
I have a 6MP FinePix S7000 which is fitted with a 2GB Lexar 80x CF card. It'll do about 1100 pics at 6MP. My only beef with CF is that it's read and write performance is apalling compared to xD (xD is something like 3x faster).
Roop
Ehhh IIRC that's compared to normal-speed CF...
xD writes at a max of 3MB/sec, whereas my Lexar 80x CF writes at a sustained 12MB/sec (with write acceleration)
It's just a matter of how much you want to spend, i.e. $30 for a slow CF card v. $90 for a blazing fast CF card
That's the difference between the 16MB xD supplied with my camera and the 80x WA enabled Lexar 2GB CF card I purchased afterwards (camera has 2 memory slots). xD is waay faster than CF.
I expect it's just my camera, because as you say CF *should* be faster.
I expect it's just my camera, because as you say CF *should* be faster.
imperialism2024 said:
Ehhh IIRC that's compared to normal-speed CF...
xD writes at a max of 3MB/sec, whereas my Lexar 80x CF writes at a sustained 12MB/sec (with write acceleration)
It's just a matter of how much you want to spend, i.e. $30 for a slow CF card v. $90 for a blazing fast CF card
Roop said:
That's the difference between the 16MB xD supplied with my camera and the 80x WA enabled Lexar 2GB CF card I purchased afterwards (camera has 2 memory slots). xD is waay faster than CF.
I expect it's just my camera, because as you say CF *should* be faster.
imperialism2024 said:
Ehhh IIRC that's compared to normal-speed CF...
xD writes at a max of 3MB/sec, whereas my Lexar 80x CF writes at a sustained 12MB/sec (with write acceleration)
It's just a matter of how much you want to spend, i.e. $30 for a slow CF card v. $90 for a blazing fast CF card
I think 3MB/sec is for the larger cards, and 1.3MB/sec is for the little cards that come with the cameras...
I could be wrong, though.
D70 doesn't support WA.
I know I've said it before but I think the increased cost on high spec cards is disproportionate to the performance gain, which can be minimal when you hit the limitations of the camera.
No one likes having the latest, best stuff more than me but it can be a waste of money on occasions like this.
My favourite analogy is it's like putting z-rated tyres on your Fiat Panda, won't do any harm but why would you..?
I know I've said it before but I think the increased cost on high spec cards is disproportionate to the performance gain, which can be minimal when you hit the limitations of the camera.
No one likes having the latest, best stuff more than me but it can be a waste of money on occasions like this.
My favourite analogy is it's like putting z-rated tyres on your Fiat Panda, won't do any harm but why would you..?
HankScorpio said:
D70 doesn't support WA.
Yep, Nikontech.com says 'Lexar Media Write Acceleration (WA) Compact Flash cards are supported in Standard Write Mode only.'
However, 40x is still 40x and 80x is still 80x. But as Hank says, there's little point in getting a card faster than your camera can read/write to. I haven't done the exact sums but I don't think there's much point in getting 80x for a D70. The good news is that 40x is going out of fashion and therefore cheap
HankScorpio said:Ah, but if you chip the Panda (firmware upgrade) or buy a Ferrari (e.g. D2X) you can use the same tyres and make full use of their Z rating. Oh, and some of the expensive Z rated tyres are summer and winter tyres too (greater operating temperature ranges).
My favourite analogy is it's like putting z-rated tyres on your Fiat Panda, won't do any harm but why would you..?
Okay, think I may hav stretched the analogy beyond breaking point there.
simpo two said:
D70 doesn't support WA.
Yep, Nikontech.com says 'Lexar Media Write Acceleration (WA) Compact Flash cards are supported in Standard Write Mode only.'
However, 40x is still 40x and 80x is still 80x. But as Hank says, there's little point in getting a card faster than your camera can read/write to. I haven't done the exact sums but I don't think there's much point in getting 80x for a D70. The good news is that 40x is going out of fashion and therefore cheap
Though 40x is still 6MB/sec if my math serves me well, versus 3MB/sec for xD...
My main point though is that compared to the shitty CF cards that typically run at 4x, or 0.6MB/sec, the xD is far superior. But most people who buy a serious digital camera will use a 4x card for nothing more than keeping a table level, and will instead use a higher-speed CF card that outperforms the xD.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff