Subject: Re: CF cards apparently not dead yet
On 11/30/2017 12:54 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article<firstname.lastname@example.org>, Tony Cooper
>>>>> 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
>>> 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).
Nobody realized what a busy person you are.
> 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.