Thanks for the comprehensive review - now I know what I have to do :-)
Phx
Moose wrote:
>Philippe Amard wrote:
>
>
>>Thanks Jim,
>>
>>it explains things about the xD, a lot ...
>>Is CF much better? they're so huge and don't fit into laptops either BTW
>>
>>
>>
>
>The big technical problem with the xD format is that it doesn't include
>a disk controller in the card. Thus, it depends on the controller
>firmware in the camera. Then Oly added some proprietary format tweaks
>for their panorama feature. The result is a fragile file system where
>doing anything at all to the card in computer or another camera before
>downloading all images may result in permanent loss. Doing anything in a
>reader on a computer may result in a card unreadable, and sometimes,
>inexplicably, unformattable by the camera.
>
>Less seriously, they peak out at 2GB and have much slower write times
>than newer CF and SD(HC) cards.
>
>CF remains the best format for serious work. They have built-in
>controllers, so are unaffected by vagaries of cameras and OSs and are
>physically close to indestructible. SDHC cards are close, but not as
>physically tough.
>
>My personal experience is that built-in card readers in computers are
>much slower than the cards are capable of. I never use the one in my
>desktop for image downloads. The small, cheap multi-card reader I posted
>about before is MUCH faster.
>
>Moose
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|