Subject: Re: CF cards apparently not dead yet
In article<firstname.lastname@example.org>, Tony Cooper<email@example.com> wrote:
> >>> Additional time to download a card, is not an important area of
> >>> photography, unless you are a photo journalist.
> >> maybe not to you, but the rest of the world disagrees.
> >> that's why people buy usb 3 hard drives instead of cheaper and slower
> >> usb 2 hard drives, it's why people buy newer and faster computers
> >> rather than use the same one they've been using since windows xp came
> >> out.
> >Uh huh!
> I must not be part of "the rest of the world".
> The time it takes for
> a card to transfer the photos to the computer is of no concern to me
> at all. Cutting that time in half would not be of any advantage. My
> usual routine is to remove the card, insert it in the reader, and
> start the upload.
> While the photos are being uploaded, I remove the battery from the
> camera and put it in the charger. By the time I finish doing that,
> and return to the computer, all the images have been uploaded.
you must not shoot very many images at a time.
> Because I upload using Import in Lightroom, the time consuming part is
> waiting for LR to generate the Smart Previews. I know I can set LR to
> generate Minimal previews, or one of the other faster options, but I
> don't mind the wait for Smart Previews.
that has absolutely nothing to do with the speed of the card.
> It's not like I have something terribly urgent or important to do in
> those extra minutes. I just Alt-Tab to a different window and check
> my email or a newsgroup.
i have an older 64 gig uhs card (the fastest available at the time)
which takes around 15 minutes to copy when it's full (very easy to do
a 256 gig card of similar speed would be in the 1 hour range.
newer and faster cards could reduce that to 20-30 minutes.