Next <
From: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Subject: Re: CF cards apparently not dead yet
Full headers:
From: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Subject: Re: CF cards apparently not dead yet
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 12:55:32 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <301120171255321938%nospam@nospam.invalid>
References: <> <> <> <291120171552201340%nospam@nospam.invalid> <> <291120172155172901%nospam@nospam.invalid> <> <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info:; posting-host="0443a8dc2665df5d13e96fb9df45c326";
logging-data="16124"; mail-complaints-to="";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19LvH/PEOI+6pJCCfVZCHNC"
User-Agent: Thoth/1.9.0 (Mac OS X)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:u8Y4UYJ8BLxIAUu7Eca/1h1TBq8=
Print Article
Forward Article
In article<>,
Whisky-dave<> wrote:

> > Additional time to download a card, is not an important area of 
> > photography, unless you are a photo journalist.
> It can be, especaily if you've come back from a holiday with umpteen cards
> that need putting on a computer, it's amazing just how slow USB2 is compared
> to USB3 once you're used to USB3.

no shit.
> Tonight I'll be off-loading ~8GB from card to computer, it usually takes a
> couple of minutes on USB3  with USB2 it's more like 15mins+

now multiply that by 32 for a 256 gig card.