From: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Subject: Re: CF cards apparently not dead yet
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
Subject: Re: CF cards apparently not dead yet
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 12:54:41 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <301120171254418909%nospam@nospam.invalid>
References: <0006b719-570c-4f61-a7dd-8ff25252f8ba@googlegroups.com> <MPG.34891a724d696eaf98cf29@news.supernews.com> <ovn6hb0mmk@news4.newsguy.com> <291120171552201340%nospam@nospam.invalid> <ovnquv0fjr@news3.newsguy.com> <291120172155172901%nospam@nospam.invalid> <ovns9h1g4h@news3.newsguy.com> <291120172209102843%nospam@nospam.invalid> <ovnt8j0glb@news3.newsguy.com> <fp6v1d5cdqqtjp87njgo0gbkddantkdplm@4ax.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="0443a8dc2665df5d13e96fb9df45c326";
logging-data="16124"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+SKXH2/G0GR6NHtFt7vuea"
User-Agent: Thoth/1.9.0 (Mac OS X)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Uh4EbmvN5Aki5Hpar8FL5KX2Rck=
Print Article
Forward Article
In article<fp6v1d5cdqqtjp87njgo0gbkddantkdplm@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper<tonycooper214@gmail.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".  

very true.

> 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
with video).

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.