hyon_hall Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 Does anyone know if the card is compatible with 20D Seagate 8 GB CompactFlash for $207 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000BO0SGG/ref=nosim/104-8096035-2346349?n=172282 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_dunn2 Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 <p>It seems Canon isn't fond of stating the maximum card size their cameras can take; they are fond of saying they can use cards 2 GB and larger (the manual says so, as does the Technical Report in the Canon Camera Museum), but I don't believe I've seen an official statement of what the upper limit is.</p> <p>It can definitely use 4 GB cards; Rob Galbraith's database shows the performance results of several 4 GB cards in the 20D. I would be surprised if it couldn't use 8 GB cards as well.</p> <p>That said, there are arguments for and against using one large card as opposed to a number of smaller cards. If you have multiple cards and one of them goes bad (or you realize you just deleted an image that you'd like to undelete), you put that card aside until you can attempt recovery, and put another card in so you can keep shooting. You can't do that if you have only one card. If you drop off your card at the local photo lab to have them make prints, you don't have to wait for that card to come back if you have multiple cards. Of course, in favour of one large card is convenience; you can take a heck of a lot of pictures on an 8 GB card before you have to pause and swap cards.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrspock Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 8gb would handle something like 2500 jpegs or 400-500 raw + jpeg. That seems like an overwhelming number of images to have to deal with from a workflow perpective. I also agree with Steve about not putting all your eggs in one basket. If that single card is either lost or defective, you'd be mighty disappointed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelvinphoto - arlington, t Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 Canon 20D is FAT32 COMPLIANCE. I believe FAT32 support up to 16 terabytes of storage. So, your camera is compatible with Compact Flash 500GB if there is one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenPapai Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 I would no sooner use an 8GB CF card than I would show up for an assignment with just one body and one flash and no backup. Eight one-GB cards are better than that 8GB monster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorge_garcia1 Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 It seems to me that the link points to an 8 GB microdrive, not Compact Flash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrispy Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 Can't seem to find the speed specs of these cards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrispy Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 I found this: Compact Flash Speeds Speed Kbytes/s Mbytes/s 1 150 0.15 4 600 0.6 12 1800 1.8 24 3600 3.6 40 6000 6 60 9000 9 80 12000 12 http://www.seagate.com/support/kb/disc/faq/photo_cf_faq.html Be carefull, a sandisk ultra II has a write speed of approx 9mb/sec, the segate has 3.6mb/sec. Not sure of your 20d but my 5d requires the speeds of the ultra II. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobatkins Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 Rubbish. The 5D will work just fine with anything from the slowest card to the fastest. You won't even see the difference unless you shoot 70 frame JPEG bursts or 17 frame bursts of RAW images. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrispy Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 "You won't even see the difference unless you shoot 70 frame JPEG bursts or 17 frame bursts of RAW images" And what's wrong with having this ability. Why not buy a card which doesn't restrict your camera. Even if you use this feature once a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobatkins Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 <em>....my 5d <b>requires</b> the speeds of the ultra II...</em> <p> No, it does not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrispy Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 "70 frame JPEG bursts or 17 frame bursts of RAW images" We already ascertaind the above, so your following comment is redundant. "....my 5d requires the speeds of the ultra II... No, it does not." You are right otherwise for every day shooting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelvinphoto - arlington, t Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 Chris, FYI, I have a Canon 1D Mark II and does 40f/sec on my Hitachi 6GB 3.6mb/sec and I am sure that my 1D Mark II is much faster than 5D. So, please don't said that 5D required speed of scandisk ultra II. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrispy Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 "Canon 1D Mark II and does 40f/sec on my Hitachi 6GB 3.6mb/sec" ? Kelvin, this is incorrect, your camera does 8.5 fps for up to 40 frames (at JPEG Large). These specs are for the internal camera buffer, if your compact flash is slow it will take longer to empty the buffer to the compact flash card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrispy Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 "The buffer of the Canon EOS 5D is huge, some 60 JPEG images of the best quality fit, or 17 RAW photos. During buffering the images are written on the memory card at the same time so the main storage memory is used efficiently. And the DIGIC II processor of course is definitely doing good service here. The use of a speedy card, like the SanDisk Extreme III is highly recommendable. It empties the buffer completely in less than 30 seconds. When shooting in JPEG you can fill up a 1GB card completely with 3 frames per second without having to wait in the meantime. This is an impressive performance! In RAW you will have to wait after 20 images but still then you can carry on shooting with 1 image per second." http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/camera/review/62/page_5.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelvinphoto - arlington, t Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 Chris, that what i mean up to 40 frame continously. So, why do you need a Ultra Scandisk II or III? Are you making a movie out of your camera? You are being rediculous with your reasoning stating that only Ultra II is fast enuff for 5D. With a buffer like that, any CF/MD is fast enuff for 5D as long as you don't try to make a movie out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrispy Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 This thread has ended up sounding like a school boy conversation. Sorry Hyon. Kelvin, the infomation is out there do what you like with your camera. My experience with my camera has been the speed of the cf makes a difference. I took photos of our newborns at quick sucssesion and found the camera had to pause even with the ultra 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyon_hall Posted January 4, 2006 Author Share Posted January 4, 2006 Thanks for all the info and opinions. At around $26 a gig, I'll try it. I'll post info about the write speed, when I get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirfish Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Anyone know how much faster (if any) the microdrive CF cards drain the camera battery as compared to the flash memory CF cards? The prices on some of the microdrive variants are pretty cheap lately...wouldn't mind taking the splash if my battery isn't going to die in 8 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyon_hall Posted January 5, 2006 Author Share Posted January 5, 2006 Fish.<BR> check out the Power section.<BR> http://www.memorysuppliers.com/hi4gbmi4cofl.html<BR> <BR> Some useful info about speed.<BR> http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007-7303<BR> Hitachi microdrive's speed is not that bad.<BR> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobatkins Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 I have power drain data here: http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/compact_flash_memory_cards.html Microdrives draw 5x to 10x more current during operation (say 50mA vs 300mA). They also draw more current when on standby (20mA vs 200uA). However, that being said, I haven't noticed any significant difference in battery life when using a microdrive. I think they operate for such short times and the rest of the camera draws so much more power that they don't affect battery life much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now