Slashdot Mirror
4Gb CF Card Announced
An anonymous reader writes "Lexar has today announced that it now shipping a 4 GB 40x Compact Flash card. The card's claim to fame is the ability to store 600 RAW images taken with a 6 megapixel digital camera. This card also features Lexar's WA (Write Acceleration) technology which can improve performance further with WA enabled cameras. Because this card is larger than 2 GB, you will need a camera which is FAT32 compliant. This card is available now at the heady price of $1,499 ($0.37/MB). It looks like Lexar has managed to be faster then Hitachi (Former IBM storage division) with their 4Gb Microdrive."
I've been toying with the idea of getting a Lexar Pro (40x) CF card.
Has anyone had any experience using the Pro cards versus the standard, and whether or not the numbers translate into noticible performance gains???
Nevertheless, this particular card is well outside of my range/needs, but a 256 or 512 for my 4.0 megapix is do-able.
The title says 4 gigabits, but the text says 4 giga bytes. 4 GB is impressive, 4Gb is not (512 MB).
is still the time it takes for a camera to transfer from on-memory to the card... no matter how big the card is, until this time is reduced, it'll still be hard for some applications ..
But it's definitely good.. I use a CF-Reader on my laptop instead of a diskdrive, and obviously, a 4 GB CF card would definitely be nice.. now I can easily transfer data between machines!
Of course, again, though, bandwidth is still an issue..
I'm not the devil.. just his advocate.
You are never going to be able to take that many pic's without changing batteries so why not have a couple of cheaper 1GB cards and swap em out with the batteries? 1GB CF cards are as cheap as $228 you are paying a more than 50% premium for the denser storage.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
How long until solid state technology replaces hard drives outright, or at least supplements them?
And, only slightly offtopic, why must PCs have pagefiles created on a hard drive? Why not have a bunch of SDRAM slots, even on a PCI card, and have 4 gigs of uber-cheap PC133, then create a 4 gig swap file in RAM (if not natively supported).
I hate having to swap to HDD, and my only option being super-pricey DDR or RDRAM upgrades.
A machine would do just fine with 256 Megs of Dual-DDR400, and 4 gigs or so of PC133. Then HDD as an absolute last resort. It plugs right in to the tiered-memory architecture, so why would this not work?
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
IBM has been producing Compact Flash Type 2 form-factor micro drives for some time now.
Here's one:
Clicky!
The gift of death metal does not smile on the good looking.
Plus what is a typical life of a CF card ? I sure hope its more than 5 years If I am putting 1000$+ in it.
Plus the very though of loosing those 600 RAW images , if i loose the CF card is disturbing.
I would rather have a portable labtop with 20GB+ memory and a 1GB flash card.
for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
a quick google search reveals that a 1 GB version is about 170... 170 * 4 = 680. At 1500 bucks, I think I'd rather just keep three other 1 gb sticks in my pocket/camera bag/whatever... granted, if you're a professional photgrapher you might think otherwise, but I recall something that we used a few years back that had to be changed every X number of pictures, what was it, oh yes... film.
I'd say it has to be easier to pop a flash card in and out of a digital camera as opposed to a roll of film... but thats just me.
This is my sig. Its pathetic.
That takes care of a single point of failure and it's $500 cheaper.
It's called an IBM MicroDrive, though it's also resold and branded through Iomega (without any different under the hood). They are mostly CF compatible, though the voltage requirements are a little different so the device needs to be MicroDrive compatible and not just CD.
The 1GB CF form factor drive runs for ~$260 on eBay including PCMCIA adapter for laptiops. Buying 4 of these at that price would save you $460 on the cost of a single 4GB CF.
Any spoon would be too big.
unrelated note... I wish all PCs would come with CF slots on them standard. i think its the best alternative to the floppy. ive even started carrying arround a card reader so i can use CF to replace my stacks of zip disks.
I want 2D games back.
As far as I can tell, this thing is only useful for professional photographers. When getting my picture taken for the cover of Pro. PHP4 MM Programming, I saw that the photographer had several 1GB CF cards strewn over his desk. Digital photos are becoming more popular because people can get them reprinted and such. There's not really a loss in quality either, since the photos are 5-7 megapixels. But you end up getting 27MB TIFF files (in B/W)! I'm sure there are other uses for this sort of storage, but this is the best example I could think of.
I think that the price to pay for CF is way too heavy for this card to fit into general use. CF cards don't have the longest lifespan in the world either. Until these prices go down, I don't think CF will become a really hot item. I mean, look at iPods. 20GB of storage at less than half the price (and it'll play your MP3s).
The other disappointment regarding the price is that it's too high to push the prices down on 1GB models, so we won't see these being shoved into consumer electronics anytime soon either.
I think that by the time CF gets to be reasonably priced, other devices of similar size and much higher capacity will be available. I don't have a good feeling about the lifespan of CF.
On the other hand, I'd like to know some of the uses that this card may see. I may be completely oblivious to its practical usage. Feel free to enlighten me as to where this could be used, what it will replace, and whether or not the price is right for that application.
www.sitetronics.com/wordpress
Experts say you should never use a card bigger than 512Kb. Why? Imagine loosing one card? You'll loose 2Gb of image information. If you use 4 cards of 512Kb, and you loose one, you will not be loosing that much info. Dont put all the eggs on the same basket.
Call on God, but row away from the rocks.
That is what the submitter was talking about with Hitachi, Hitachi bought IBM's HDD assets including the Microdrive line. Hitachi is supposed to unveil a 4GB Microdrive this fall. The Microdrive is less shock resistant, eats up to 4X the battery life, and has slower transfer rates than the high speed flash products out there, initially the 4GB Microdrive may be cheaper, but within probably 9-18 months the flash will almost certainly be cheaper, that's the way it happened with the origional Microdrive (actually there wasn't any 1GB CF card at the time that I could find, but there was soon after).
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
A while ago Pretec announced 3GB and 6GB CF card, while 3GB is out, 6GB capacity CF is still no where in sight yet. but the competition from 4GB card surely will start driving the price down.
Many hobby OSes are not using paging in their development. While it is a well documented part of OS design and development, most new hobby OS makers are simply leaving it out with the reason that, if their OS ever did evolve to take up that much RAM, it's so cheap that one could easily buy more.
For the multi-tiered model to work, there would need to be specific slots for swapping memory, which would cost space on the motherboard. Then OS developers would have to start supporting this model.
While this is a fun idea, it isn't practical because:
a) Memory is *CHEAP* and if you run out of it, you can always page to the hard drive,
b) All modern systems and OSes support 1-4GB RAM, which is definitely enough for most (any?) consumer (at the moment),
c) If you have 4GB of RAM being used, you should be upgrading to a more powerful computer, not adding 256MB swap. Chances are you're going to need a lot more swap space than that if you're doing work requiring more than 4GB RAM.
d) Finally, if you use this extra 256MB RAM, you're still swapping anyway. So why not just make systems support more RAM in the first place?
I hope I adequately answered your question
www.sitetronics.com/wordpress
600 RAW * 6M pixels = 3,6G pixels or 3,6gigabit. At a minimum of 8 bits color resolution per pixel, it'll be 3,6 gigabytes.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Think about it... 6 Divx movies in the palm of your hand...
Now to create a card reader/decoder for my DVD player...
Why worry? Each of us is wearing an unlicensed "nucular" accelerator on his back.
Sig changed for readability by G.W.
I am currently using one of the Lexar 2GB cards for a Hard Drive on an embedded box that I put together. It's faster than IDE flash drives and costs MUCH less. A 512mb IDE flash drive costs about the same as a 2GB Compact Flash card. I have also tried using the 2GB Compact Flash cards by Pretc. I do not recommend using these cards for a drive. They proved to be extremely slow and some applications would not function with them. Lexar has really come out with a nice poroduct here!
Sandisk is working on a 4GB card as well, but it is not yet released.
- Slew -
What's the MTBF on these things? I've had CF cards go bad on me before, and it's always a bummer when you lose photos. I personally think it's best to go with several mid-sized cards rather than one gargantuan one. That way, if a single card goes bad, you don't lose everything. Even for pro-tographers who take zillions of pictures, it's a good idea. Changing a CF card takes less time than changing a roll of film, so it won't interrupt the workflow all that much. Plus it might save you a major headache should you lose everything.
On the same lines, I think someone should come out with a redundant flash card. Instead of a single 4GB card, perhaps two 2GB cards in one, with the storage mirrored as in a RAID. I know some people might pay extra for the added security/redundancy.
This card is targeted to high end users with 6 and 12 Mpixel cameras. They shoot raw images (lossless compression). Very high file sizes are created. It is not geared to the 2 Mpixel consumer camera which is using jpeg compression. Tarring or zipping jpeg compressed immages would be pointless since the images are ALREADY compressed far beyond what normal compression can do.
CF cards are used for more than cameras. If you want anything else to be able to read your pictures, you need to have a standard way of representing the files on the card. Suprisingly, we call this a "filesystem". If you want every camera to have it's own proprietary storage that only that camera can use, and can only be read by a special hardware adapter with special software, then by all means, then by all means, keep pushing the use of Forth(!?) as way of writing files.
...will be the elimination of the MP3 player market.
It frustrates me to no end that I carry around a rather remarkably-specced PDA that could handily play MP3s... but I'm hampered by limited storage. It's like being unable to drive your Corvette because you can't buy enough gas.
The high-capacity portable-medium format will obsolesce one device from my gadget arsenal. One less battery to recharge; one less file store to maintain; one less device for firmware, driver updates, and connectors.
David Stein, Esq.
Computer over. Virus = very yes.
My primary drive is 8 GB. Windows uses only half of it (other half is BSD). Yes, I have another drive in there too. Obviously, I don't store a lot of music and video. The point is, it's looking more and more realistic for at least some users like myself to have totally solid-state PCs. Quiet PC nirvanna; just around the corner.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
No. The prefix thanato is for words pertaining to death.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
There is a HUGE difference between png/tiff vs jpeg and raw vs jpeg.
Raw isnt just lossless compression, but rather using the direct output of the image sensor. This preserves a higher dynamic range (like 12bit per pixel) and you can later set a white balance ect in your computer.
Just make a underexposed picture with jpeg and try to salvage anything with photoshop. All formerly dark areas will be a happy 8x8 macroblock land...
HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
What am I supposed to do with a number like that? I can't relate to it or determine how this would suit my needs. Put it into terms I recognize, like Libraries of Congress. How many Volkswagons fit in one of these? Is this still Slashdot?
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
That's great, but there's a chipper solution with more storage.
Digital Wallet - 30GB $399.99, or 10GB $259.25
FlashTrax 30GB digital storage - 30GB $499
I've heard that FAT32 is very bad to have on Flash because it keeps updating the disk space counter almost with every write. If this effect happens on a card of this size it might not last for more than a month if you fill it often.
What's the deal with measuring speed as multiples of ancient cdroms? How long is this gonna go on? Am I supposed to walk around with a pocket calculator in order to figure out what the actally speed of merchandise is? Quick: how many MBps in 48x?
It's like measuring the power of a space shuttle's lunch rockets using horse power. "Oh, you mean if we tie down 1 million and a half horses to the shuttle we'd be able to get it off the ground? Impressive..."
The power of Christ compiles you!
As a 10D user, shooting raw. I currently consume about 4 512MB cards during a shoot.
After the first two cards, I find myself slowing down in the picture taking, which is not necessarily a good thing.
If I had 4GB, I would use it.
I also use these cards to transfer data between work and home, or between friends computers and mine. The size of the data transferred frequently exceeds my capacity.
Now all we need to do, is to have them work on the price. If that price was for 40Gb then I may consider it, but as it is, I'll buy 4 1GB cards and save a few bucks.
Gator/Claria is Spyware.
However, the Microdrive is more appropriate in situations where there will be a lot of writing to the media - I'd much rather have a Microdrive mounted as a swap partition than a CF card on my CerfCube. :-)
For pretty much all other uses, I'd agree that CF is probably the better choice.
Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
raw images aren't 'stupid'. They allow the photographer much more latitude in the post-production process in a digital darkroom. By recording everything the camera senses, you are allowed a greater range of exposure compensation than even the newer jpeg formats.
In God we trust,
everyone else we firewall!!
I have a digicam that has that annoying button latency problem (Nikon 5000). The secret to using that camaera is to use the LCD, and keep your finger hovering over first button pressing it down the first stop, vs the second, thus keeping the camera energized and focused.
With my canon 10D it has a lesser latency and the ability to change the iso so I can keep the shutter speed between 1/30-1/4000 so it becomes easier to capture a shot then 1-1/30.
I can do the same with the Nikon cp5000, but the latency seems to be more of a problem then the shutter speed.
Gator/Claria is Spyware.
Too true. When my SO and I tried to take some nekkid pictures, all the naughty bits were blurred out.
hang brain.
I've seen two misstatements repeated over and over again in this discussion. Folks have been suggesting that flash cards like this might represent the future of hard drives. They've also been mentioning that it has a higher speed than the IBM microdrive.
.5 seconds as well. Typical UNIX filesystems like ext2 or ffs, keep their data structures in fixed locations. Most writes are to metadata, and they will cause the metadata parts of a CF card to be erased and overwritten over and over again. Unlike a hard drive which can survive almost unlimited cycles like this, you will only get a few thousand in flash memory. Copying a set of files might burn out some cells in a single operation.
While this is true in a camera, where you tend to erase an entire card and then fill it in a linear fasion, this isn't true when you use it as a hard drive. Flash memory has two things which make it unique, slow erasures, and limited numbers of cycles. Unlike a hard drive, where you can simply overwrite data, in flash memory you have to erase a region of it first. Usually you also have to erase a much larger region than a filesystem block (64k vs 4k). These erasures can be as painful as
The log-structured filesystem (lfs) presents a partial solution to this, by writing data in blocks, deleting it in blocks, and writing to the end of a disk before starting over again. Unfortunatly, lfs becomes unefficient once fragmentation starts to set in, as a "cleaner" is necessary to group data back into blocks.
I still think one of these would be cool in my camera, but I want a 4G microdrive for my computer.
Adam
Would you do it for some scoobie crack?
For the purposes of digital SLR cameras, $1500 is not 3x the price of a camera.
Digital SLRs _start_ at $1500 and go up to $8000 for the current models.
Good lenses range from $300 to several thousand. The price of a $1500 CF card is not going to deter any professional photographer that needs the storage.
On the other hand Flash media isn't exactly cheap yet, so I don't see it being used for anything that doesn't require long battery life, no fans, and jiggle-tollerance (no boob jokes).
Galium Arsenide is the material of the future, and always will be.
Cheaper still and even more points of failure!
I think, that an image in the raw format preserves information about alignment of RGB cells in every pixel of the camera. This is a sub-pixel data. It allows you to produce more accurate end picture after processing.
There are many configurations for camera sensors. For example:
GRGRGR
BGBGBG
GRGRGR
RGBRGB
RGBRGB
RGBRGB
R-G-B-R-G
-B-R-G-B-
R-G-B-R-G
-B-R-G-B-
This is not nearly *enough* storage for the next major application of Flash - Video. Panasonic is currently working on a Pro Video Camera with an array of similar speed Flash working in parallel to replace DVCPRO 25Mbps video tape. (Final product should be at NAB in April) There are high quality audio recorders (Marantz and others) already using Compact Flash cards for radio stations and they work great. The things will make a huge difference to people like me in the professional media industry. No capturing video before editing - just copy it across.
From the Lexar Media website [digitalfilm.com] / [lexarmedia.com]
It is important to note that cards greater than 2 GB can only be used in cameras that support the FAT32 file system. Please be sure to install the latest version of Image Rescue (version 1.1.5) that is bundled on the card on your computers before using the card in a camera.
Image Rescue can assist you in properly reformatting the cards to FAT32 if they are mistakenly used in a non-FAT32 compliant camera.
At this time the 4 GB card can be used with the following cameras that support FAT32 and have a CF Type II slot.
Cameras that accept CompactFlash Type II that are also FAT32-compatible:
Canon Powershot G3
Canon Powershot G5
Canon Powershot S45
Canon Powershot S50
Canon EOS 10D
Canon EOS-1Ds
Kodak DCS 720X (A CompactFlash-to-PC Card adapter is required with these models)
Kodak DCS 760 (A CompactFlash-to-PC Card adapter is required with these models)
Kodak DCS Pro Back (all models)
Kodak DCS Pro 14n
Olympus E-1
Hmm, you may want to keep that in mind before you consider this product.
Larger compact flash cards are now big enough to act as replacements for hard-drives for small/special purpose PCs. For example, my firewall, even with all of it's logging only needs about 200M of storage.
I could use a CF card to build a small/slow PC with no moving parts (fanless also). That seems like it would be a lot more reliable.
However, how well do Compact Flash cards deal with continuous writing and rewriting? How long could a card handle the data being logging to disk from my firewall before it starting having errors?
How much of a problem would the slower write times be? In the case of the firewall, I would expect there to be enough ram to keep the slow CF read/write times from being a problem, but how much difference is there overall?
plus-good, double-plus-good
I've read quite a few comments from people speculating that a particular filesystem (fat32) will cause issues because all the wear is concentrated in the FAT sectors, etc. This just isn't the case because the card will do wear-leveling in hardware, including replacing bad blocks with good blocks from a spare pool. Other interfaces (Mem Stick/MMC/SD/SM) do not have this advantage, as CF has a built-in intelligent controller to manage this behavior. The others allow direct access to sectors, and thus it is possible to "burn" a particular sector by writing to it repeatedly.
Here's a link to a FAQ about a CF interface for the Apple II, which discusses the issue (or lack thereof): http://dreher.net/CFforAppleII/FAQ.html
Here's a link to a maker of CF controllers and a description of their features: http://www.mittoni.com/compactflash/article5.html