Cheap Digital Camera

[mutz]

I've had a 1 GB IBM Microdrive for a year now, absolutely problem free, and it's a tad faster than cards. It costs, but to go on a trip, or whatever, and shoot 500 top res or 910 next to top res pics without thinking about running out of space is worth a lot.

There have been stories about problems with Microdrives, but as it turns out it has been mostly from them being dropped or misshandled.

Some time this year a super fast 4 GB drive is coming out. That might be an overkill, unless you have a 12 megapixel professional camera...

[Greebe]

Some time this year a super fast 4 GB drive is coming out. That might be an overkill, unless you have a 12 megapixel professional camera...

or take pics like I do

[az]

I, too, have a microdrive, and have no problems with it.

But some corrections: A Microdrive is CHEAP compared to other high-capacity media, like CF (though CFs are coming down in price now, and I've heard that they're already cheaper than a MD in the USA). And a Microdrive might be faster than a Sandisk Card, but it's definately NOT faster than a Lexar 40x (not to mention a WA Lexar in a WA enabled cam, of which there are only but a few).

AZ

[mutz]

Right. What I meant by "it costs" is that the Microdrive costs as much or more than some cameras, so if you are already on a tight budget for a camera, a Microdrive is out of the question.

Of course if you happen to have a notebook you can always tote that around too...

In March I was on La Reunion for a month and came back with around a thousand 2272 x 1704 x 24 bpp pix, which would have been at least two thousand if I hadn't dumped the less than perfect. Of course toward the end of the trip I was beginning to get paranoid over the thought that the Microdrive might somehow get corrupted, and all my efforts would puff, disappear.

The game has changed. With film you hope you got it in the can. With digital, you know what you've got in the can, but wonder if it's gonna stay there 'til you've got it downloaded.

Whatever, I'll take digital. I have complete control from input to output, and the quality of both is equal. Being able to store only 54 pix instead of a thousand just heightens the challenge.

[Kurt]

Originally posted by az
I, too, have a microdrive, and have no problems with it.

But some corrections: A Microdrive is CHEAP compared to other high-capacity media, like CF (though CFs are coming down in price now, and I've heard that they're already cheaper than a MD in the USA). And a Microdrive might be faster than a Sandisk Card, but it's definately NOT faster than a Lexar 40x (not to mention a WA Lexar in a WA enabled cam, of which there are only but a few).

AZ

Actually a microdrive costs exactly the same as CF (here at least).

I just bought a canon G3 (4 Mpixels) with a 512MB Kingston CF for a friend who loves to spend tons of money on cameras (it's actually a second camera for when he goes hiking and doesn't want to carry his 2000 € argentic one). I thought I'd buy a 1GB microdrive but it was double the price (the 512 CF was also double the price the 256 CF etc). CF is now really cheap in the 32-64MB range. Above 128MB it follows capacity multiples.

Anyway, all I can say is: don't buy a cheap camera. The Canon A series is not really worth it -as much of the other ones. A good digital still-camera will set you back about 600 € -that's the way it goes since about 6 years now...

You can buy cheaper, but don't hope for miracles -it'd be like buying a cheap reflex and wondering why the picture doesn't look as great as on a 300€ one...

[Wombat]

Microdrives do suck up a lot more power though, so make sure you have spare batteries.

[mutz]

Well... on the battery side, I'd say the LCD display uses more than all of the rest of the camera combined. I've had a Canon G2 for exactly a year now. The only time the battery ever ran out was last weekend when we were in the mountains visiting friends and my partner got photo fever and took pix of everything in sight, and in between she would proudly show me, then our friends, and go off again. I don't think she turned it off once and the camera never had a moment for it's own battery saving shut down. At sunset she wanted to take the last shots and the screen went black. I then shut the LCD, turned the camera off and on again, gave her the camera telling her to use the optical viewer, and she took four more shots.

I poked the Microdrive in when I got the camera and haven't touched it since. Just download over USB.

[VJ]

az: Pehaps interesing (and a pro-CompactFlash argument) is that there exist xD readers in CF-format. This allows one to use xD cards in CF cameras (the xD card doesn't protude).
I wouldn't fully agree with you on the non-branded card issue, my cards are Ridata (not a known brand), but are a lot faster than the standard SanDisks (ok, slower than the Lexars; they are rated at about 12x), but I got them about 4 times cheaper than the slower Sandisks. Of course, there still are much less known brands that one really ought to stay clear from.

The microdrive is quite performant, it mainly loses because of its spinup-time; once it is spinning it reads/writes quite fast. Personally, I feel the best times for the Microdrive have past, with CF-cards now haven fallen so much in price. But bearing in mind that the microdrive exists for about 3-4 years or so, it was an enormous feat back then to have so much storage in a small space.


I currently have 3 512GB cards, which is not that much. But then again, you only need a lot of storage when travelling. 4GB is not overkill if you intend to shoot RAW with higher end cameras. RAW files with my camera are about 9.5 MB : which equals about 50 pictures on a 512 MB card; compressed RAW (5 MB) gets around 100, but takes 40s to write + is not completely lossless (though I haven't seen the loss, it is said that they do away with a number of colour-depth bits - e.g. 8 in stead of 12 per channel for my camera; nevertheless, I used this when travelling). Writing TIFF is currently out of the question; the files are 36 MB (14 pictures on 512 MB); not that I intend to shoot TIFF, but it just goes to show that even with a 6MP camera, larger cards are welcome.


Jörg

[az]

Wombat, actually, the MD only spins up for transfers, then spins down immediately (which helps both power consumption and shock resistance - I know people who dropped their MDs 1m on concrete floor, and they survived. I know of some who've killed their MDs that way, too, though.). Some (especially cheap) CF cards don't properly enter standby and thus use more energy than an MD.

That said, I would buy a Lexar 32x CF over a MD anytime, for the same or slightly higher price. But an MD is certainly not a bad option if CFs are too expensive.

Kurt, if you say the Canon A series aren't good... Then I'd definately Recommend a Minolta Dimage F100. This thing cost over 600 EUR a year ago, has 4mp, a good, sharp (albeit extracting a little slowly) 3x zoom lens, good autofocus and white balance, and manual controls. And now it's really cheap.

AZ

[az]

VJ: Actually, Ridata are a brand name, and are known for their speed, IIRC.

I agree with you on all other points though

AZ

[VJ]

Originally posted by az
VJ: Actually, Ridata are a brand name, and are known for their speed, IIRC.

Oops... Well, when I bought them, I never heard of them (and they are impossible to find here in Belgium). I considered the brandnames to be Sandisk, Lexar, Viking and Kinston (perhaps even Transcend ?). I have read some very bad things on non-branded products though (Mr Flash I believe, and some others)...


Jörg

[Kurt]

Ridata is Ricoh AFAIK.

[VJ]

It is Ritek actually...

http://www.ritek.com.tw/

(it could be there is a link with Ricoh, but I didn't think so)

Jörg

[GNEP]

Is there such a thing as a CF reader that connects to the USB port and doesn't need drivers to appear as a removable drive in Win2k? I know they exist as "keyrings" but haven't seen CF reader versions...

[VJ]

Yes, they exist.
Dane elec recently has released their zMate; the Microtech Zio! is also well known. Sandisk and Lexar also make such readers. The reader shows up as a removable storage device (similar to those pen drives). I believe (not sure though) that the Dane Elec zMate is USB2 (one of the first ?).

edit: many manufacturers make combo readers, but I'm not sure how they show up. I know some simply have a driveletter for every slot they have, and I think they also don't need drivers....

Some (many ?) cameras even show up as a removable storage device, e.g. when I connect my D100, my XP simply adds a driveletter (no drivers were needed).

Jörg