Re: OT SD the future?
For the record, that's an incorrect quote. Rob Studdert said that in a post that included a quote from one of my responses, but you didn't include anything of my quote here. :-) grz Godfrey On Jun 19, 2007, at 12:05 PM, Amita Guha wrote: > Interesting. I just bought my first Olympus on Sunday (the SP-550 UZ) > so I'm entering the world of XD for the first time. I guess I'll see > how it goes. > > Amita > >> On 17/06/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I have seen many xD cards >> rendered inoperable (in camera only) though transfer >> corruptions/accidental formats, it's a very poor system. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT SD the future?
Interesting. I just bought my first Olympus on Sunday (the SP-550 UZ) so I'm entering the world of XD for the first time. I guess I'll see how it goes. Amita > On 17/06/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have seen many xD cards > rendered inoperable (in camera only) though transfer > corruptions/accidental formats, it's a very poor system. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT SD the future?
On 18/6/07, wendy beard, discombobulated, unleashed: > >CF is the pro format? >My 1Dmk2 takes CF and SD. Does that mean it's only a semi-pro camera ;-) > >W The SD card slot in your 1D is so you can help out Pentax users by reformatting their cards -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT SD the future?
- Original Message - From: "wendy beard" Subject: Re: OT SD the future? > > CF is the pro format? > My 1Dmk2 takes CF and SD. Does that mean it's only a semi-pro camera ;-) I think they call those "bridge cameras" WW -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT SD the future?
On 6/16/07, graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, XD is their semi-proprietary format, and CF is the pro format. CF is the pro format? My 1Dmk2 takes CF and SD. Does that mean it's only a semi-pro camera ;-) W -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT SD the future?
On 17/06/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Olympus and Fuji continue to use xD ... Don't know why other than > stubbornness. There is no advantage to xD over the myriad of SD > compatible formats at all. I can't figure why they persist either, probably similar reasons that Sony persist with that hideous memory stick. I have seen many xD cards rendered inoperable (in camera only) though transfer corruptions/accidental formats, it's a very poor system. SD would be far preferable as a second card choice. What I find interesting though is that Olympus still consider it pertinent to include CF on a current body (unlike Pentax). Maybe they want it to appeal to professionals as a second more portable system? -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://picasaweb.google.com/distudio/PESO http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT SD the future?
Ohm he shouldn't. But that decision should be based on the $800 part of the total cost, not on the $20. On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:37:15PM -0400, graywolf wrote: > Well, if his istD does what he needs it to do why should he spend that $820? > > My pocket pc, laptop, and camera all take CF. Now the camera also takes XD > cards, the laptop also takes pcmcia cards, and the pocket pc also takes SD > cards: while the laptop and desktop take usb-flash as well. Which would you > standardize on? > > By the way, I probably have the most expensive card reader on the list. I use > the IBM Thinkpad over the wireless network to read CF into the desktop. Think > of it a $3000 card reader . Of course I only paid $300 for the used > Thinkpad but that still is a pretty expensive card reader; luckily I have > other uses for it as well. > > -- > graywolf > http://www.graywolfphoto.com > http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf > "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" > --- > > > John Francis wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 08:59:15AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> I opted to stick with my *ist D because I had a few CF cards. I didn't > >> want to have to spend more money to get SD cards to use on a newer Pentax. > > > > Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. A 2GB 150x card in now, what, $20? > > Saving that kind of money is definitely a reason to forego any possible > > improvements in camera technology. Especially since the only plausible > > step-up from a *ist-D at present is the K10D, which is going to set you > > back $800 or so. > > > > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT SD the future?
Well, if his istD does what he needs it to do why should he spend that $820? My pocket pc, laptop, and camera all take CF. Now the camera also takes XD cards, the laptop also takes pcmcia cards, and the pocket pc also takes SD cards: while the laptop and desktop take usb-flash as well. Which would you standardize on? By the way, I probably have the most expensive card reader on the list. I use the IBM Thinkpad over the wireless network to read CF into the desktop. Think of it a $3000 card reader . Of course I only paid $300 for the used Thinkpad but that still is a pretty expensive card reader; luckily I have other uses for it as well. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- John Francis wrote: > On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 08:59:15AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> I opted to stick with my *ist D because I had a few CF cards. I didn't >> want to have to spend more money to get SD cards to use on a newer Pentax. > > Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. A 2GB 150x card in now, what, $20? > Saving that kind of money is definitely a reason to forego any possible > improvements in camera technology. Especially since the only plausible > step-up from a *ist-D at present is the K10D, which is going to set you > back $800 or so. > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT SD the future?
Yeah, my *ist D still does the job I got it for when it came out. No reason to spend more $$ to upgrade. Plus, I still use my classic Pentax silver ESII and my PZ-1p 35mm cameras. No need for SD cards on those cameras. On Jun 16, 2007, at 11:59 AM, John Francis wrote: > On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 08:59:15AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> I opted to stick with my *ist D because I had a few CF cards. I >> didn't >> want to have to spend more money to get SD cards to use on a newer >> Pentax. > > Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. A 2GB 150x card in now, what, $20? > Saving that kind of money is definitely a reason to forego any > possible > improvements in camera technology. Especially since the only > plausible > step-up from a *ist-D at present is the K10D, which is going to set > you > back $800 or so. > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT SD the future?
On Jun 15, 2007, at 10:56 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote: > I see that Olympus managed to shoehorn both an xD Picture card and > Compact Flash (Type I and II) memory cards into their tiny E-410. > Didn't anyone tell them that they should have used SD? Olympus and Fuji continue to use xD ... Don't know why other than stubbornness. There is no advantage to xD over the myriad of SD compatible formats at all. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT SD the future?
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 08:59:15AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I opted to stick with my *ist D because I had a few CF cards. I didn't > want to have to spend more money to get SD cards to use on a newer Pentax. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. A 2GB 150x card in now, what, $20? Saving that kind of money is definitely a reason to forego any possible improvements in camera technology. Especially since the only plausible step-up from a *ist-D at present is the K10D, which is going to set you back $800 or so. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT SD the future?
I opted to stick with my *ist D because I had a few CF cards. I didn't want to have to spend more money to get SD cards to use on a newer Pentax. Plus, I have a Canon D60 that uses CF cards. (I believe Canon still uses CF cards for their dslr's.) SD storage may have come down in price, but I would have to spend more money. Jim A. > I see that Olympus managed to shoehorn both an xD Picture card and > Compact Flash (Type I and II) memory cards into their tiny E-410. > Didn't anyone tell them that they should have used SD? > > -- > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://picasaweb.google.com/distudio/PESO > http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT SD the future?
Geeze! What a maroon, that of course should be, "my C-5050Z". -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- graywolf wrote: > Well, XD is their semi-proprietary format, and CF is the pro format. It is > what me CD-5550Z has and it is OK, although I would prefer SD and CF. But the > XD is 1/2 the size of an SD card. Now that they are reasonably cheap I should > get a larger one and just leave it in the camera as permanent memory and use > the CF as a transfer card. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT SD the future?
Well, XD is their semi-proprietary format, and CF is the pro format. It is what me CD-5550Z has and it is OK, although I would prefer SD and CF. But the XD is 1/2 the size of an SD card. Now that they are reasonably cheap I should get a larger one and just leave it in the camera as permanent memory and use the CF as a transfer card. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- Digital Image Studio wrote: > I see that Olympus managed to shoehorn both an xD Picture card and > Compact Flash (Type I and II) memory cards into their tiny E-410. > Didn't anyone tell them that they should have used SD? > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
OT SD the future?
I see that Olympus managed to shoehorn both an xD Picture card and Compact Flash (Type I and II) memory cards into their tiny E-410. Didn't anyone tell them that they should have used SD? -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://picasaweb.google.com/distudio/PESO http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
