Microdrive vs Compact Flash - DPChallenge Forums

09/04/2005 01:59:16 PM · #1

I want to buy a new card for a Canon 350XT and found these two options at Dell:

1. Hitachi 6GB Microdrive - $249 after rebate
Maximum sustained data transfer of 9.2MB/sec; 128K data buffer; 12ms seek time; CF+ type II / IDE interface.

2. Kingston 4GB Compact Flash 2 Elite Pro Card - $207 with coupon
Read speeds up to 6.1MB/sec; write speeds up to 5.2MB/sec.

I'd love recommendations from people who own either of these two products, but mainly I don't know the difference between a Compact Flash Drive and a Microdrive. The research I've done online seems to indicate that they are basically interchangeable and everything about this Microdrive looks better than this CF card, so why is the price per GB so much better? Are CF cards simply better in some way or is this Microdrive just a really great deal? Thanks!

C-Fox

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

09/04/2005 02:03:35 PM · #2

compact flash is far far more stable. A microdrive is just what it says a little tiny hard-drive with moving parts. A compact flash card can go through the washing machine and you can still read the pictures on it. They are more expensive but to me the piece of mind is worth it.

Less then 4 years ago I paid over 500.00 for a 1GB Compact flash card, so yes both of the prices are good deals. Although like computers expect them to continue to come out faster/bigger/cheaper

Message edited by author 2005-09-04 14:09:28.

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II

09/04/2005 02:05:50 PM · #3

A microdrive has moving parts. It has been my experience that if something can break it will. The less moving parts the better. I don't know that a CF will last any longer then a microdrive, but I'll err on the side of common sense and stay with solid state.

pacpinto

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

09/04/2005 02:08:39 PM · #4

The basic difference is that a Microdrive has a tiny hard disk inside it, whereas CF cards are all memory-based.
This basically means that the Microdrive has mechanical, moving parts inside it so it may be considered as not-so-rugged as CF cards that are all electronic devices, with no mechanical parts.
If you will be using the card intensively (outdoor shooting, sports, camping trips, etc.) then I would strongly recommend the CF card over the Microdrive... heck, I would go with the CF in any situation...
HTH

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II

09/04/2005 02:11:23 PM · #5

In addition to fragility concerns, the Microdrive will be slightly slower and use some of your camera's battery power.

pacpinto

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

09/04/2005 02:12:11 PM · #6

Originally posted by C-Fox:

A compact flash card can go through the washing machine and you can still read the pictures on it. They are more expensive but to me the piece of mind is worth it.

Did that really, actually, happened to you? Just curious... I have a 1GB CF card that so far has demonstrated extreme stability and ruggedness, but... I wouldn't want to forget it on my pants' pocket...

PhilipDyer

09/04/2005 02:12:29 PM · #7

Thanks, everyone! That seems like a reasonable explanation. Would you or anyone recommend the compact flash card I mentioned above, or do you think those read/write speeds at 4GB will be frustratingly slow? Would more speed at this card size be worth the fairly sizeable extra investment? Of course, it's always an alternative to step back to a faster 2GB card.

Message edited by author 2005-09-04 14:13:07.

C-Fox

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

09/04/2005 02:14:53 PM · #8

Originally posted by pacpinto:

Originally posted by C-Fox:
A compact flash card can go through the washing machine and you can still read the pictures on it. They are more expensive but to me the piece of mind is worth it.

Did that really, actually, happened to you? Just curious... I have a 1GB CF card that so far has demonstrated extreme stability and ruggedness, but... I wouldn't want to forget it on my pants' pocket...

\

Yes I really have washed a compact flash card and had it still working fine. (I also have really dropped a 10D Canon 4 feet on to cement and only had the plastic covering the metal body scuffed, but I wouldn't recommend anyone else testing these things on their own equipment both times I had to hold my breath waiting to see if they still worked)

09/04/2005 02:16:03 PM · #9

Hell, I'll be happy when hard drives for my computer go solid state. Imagine how much cooler and how much faster the computer would run. (and quieter)

Brent_Ward

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L USM

09/04/2005 02:18:15 PM · #10

I've used a 1 gb micro drive since the d60. It still works fine. I have an ultra II 1 gb and they seem to work about the same. I also have a 4gb micro drive that just came with the 1D Mark II I just bought.

The main issue is that it's not a matter of "if" the drive will fail, it's when. Buy the compact flash

Message edited by author 2005-09-04 14:18:32.

C-Fox

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

09/04/2005 02:22:01 PM · #11

Originally posted by PhilipDyer:

Currently cameras don't use nearly the speed the fastest compact flash cards can. Were the slowness can hurt is downloading the chips to your computer. You would have to look up the specs for your particular camera to see what the write speeds to the card slot is. Your camera holds a buffer for sending shots to the card so look at that number and see if with your shooting style how quickly that buffer clears makes a difference to you and how much a one. (most particularly look to see your camera's specs if the camera can only send at 2x then it does matter when shooting if your card is a 2x a 4x or a 32x) Sorry I couldn't be more helpful but I am sure the numbers are out there.

09/04/2005 02:23:29 PM · #12

Originally posted by PhilipDyer:

Would you or anyone recommend the compact flash card I mentioned above, or do you think those read/write speeds at 4GB will be frustratingly slow? Would more speed at this card size be worth the fairly sizeable extra investment? Of course, it's always an alternative to step back to a faster 2GB card.

I don't think the buffer on your 300D will be able to bog down the 4Gb card. It will transfer data at a faster rate then your camera can.

PhilipDyer

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

09/04/2005 02:29:54 PM · #13

Thanks again. All of your replies have been very helpful!

SteveJ

Canon EOS-7D

09/04/2005 02:33:22 PM · #14

I usually have a couple of 1Gb CF cards in my bag when I go out, never needed to use any more than that, in fact, the second one doesn't get used that often.

Also, if a 1Gb gets corrupted, it is cheaper to replace than a 4Gb.

Steve

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

09/04/2005 02:53:01 PM · #15

I'm in the camp that says more and smaller is better. I don't trust recording media, I want to spread the load around. I work with 256 Mb cards myself because I happened to already have them, 3 of them, and I've yet to use the thrid one on a single day's shooting. But then, I'm a pretty discrimnate shooter; it is a carryover from my larger-format days, where the raw COST of shooting a single image in color could be measured in the 10's of dollars when you took bracketing into account.

Anyway, I'd rather have 4 256 cards than a single 1 Gb card. I might feel differently if I shot in huge quantities regularly. And I wouldn't touch a microdrive card on basic principles. I don't like tiny, moving parts if I can avoid 'em.

R.

kiropractic

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

09/04/2005 03:19:09 PM · #16

I think it is all about how you treat your equipment and the available money that you have. I am a student (at least for 3 more weeks) and money is really really tight. If I can get a 2GB card for 80 bucks and have lots of memory, I will go for it. I have never had a problem with them as my friend who shoots for the AJC (the atlanta paper). He said unless you just really abuse your equipment, like some people do the "pool cameras" the MicroDrive is fine. I'm very gentle with my stuff so the cost savings is worth it...at least right now.

K-Rob

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

09/04/2005 03:21:33 PM · #17

Originally posted by bear_music:

I work with 256 Mb cards myself because I happened to already have them, 3 of them, and I've yet to use the thrid one on a single day's shooting.

You never shoot more than 500mb in a shoot? Do you shoot RAW? I could not imagine going to a shoot with less than 1GB. That's just simply not enough when you shoot RAW. JPG...maybe. I can undertand that prior habbits of the film days will cause you to be more discriminate in your shooting, but why be discriminate if you don't need to with digital? I do agree, however, that several smaller cards would be a safer bet. "Don't put all your eggs in one basket!" But just 3 256mb cards?.....I don't know about that.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

09/04/2005 03:28:06 PM · #18

Originally posted by K-Rob:

Originally posted by bear_music:
I work with 256 Mb cards myself because I happened to already have them, 3 of them, and I've yet to use the thrid one on a single day's shooting.

You never shoot more than 500mb in a shoot? Do you shoot RAW? I could not imagine going to a shoot with less than 1GB. That's just simply not enough when you shoot RAW. JPG...maybe. I can undertand that prior habbits of the film days will cause you to be more discriminate in your shooting, but why be discriminate if you don't need to with digital? I do agree, however, that several smaller cards would be a safer bet. "Don't put all your eggs in one basket!" But just 3 256mb cards?.....I don't know about that.

Yeah, I shoot only RAW with the 20D. I've yet to hit 512mb in a single day. That's just how I work, I guess. If I were to hit the road and a photo safari, I'd need more storage for sure. I'll get a 2Gb card as soon as the money frees up.

As to "why be discriminate if you don't have to", all I can say is that the process, for me, involves a lot of thought and previsualization and relatively little shooting. In my experience, when you "scattershoot" you end up with a lot of images, none of which are perfect. I take my time and seek optimum results on each shot. It's not unusal for me to find a vantage point and wait there half a day for the light to be perfect.

But bear in mind that I'm primarily a landscape and still-life shooter; it would be different if I were into sports or candids, for example.

Robt.

K-Rob

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

09/04/2005 03:33:50 PM · #19

Yeah, I suppose it's different perspectives. I've shot two family/baby shoots the past couple of weekends and I have to shoot the same pose about 10 times trying to get the right expression. I filled up that 1gb card real quick. But on a regular day of shooting casually I don't usually get more than 20 shots. In that case the 256mb cards makes a ton of sense.

Message edited by author 2005-09-04 15:39:27.

riot

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

Helios 40-1 85mm f/1.5

09/04/2005 08:34:19 PM · #20

Originally posted by C-Fox:

Currently cameras don't use nearly the speed the fastest compact flash cards can.

Rubbish. Compact flash speed tests with the 20D.

Makka

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

09/04/2005 08:36:36 PM · #21

Having worked in camera retail I would much rather use CF (solid state) cards than a microdrive style card. I have seen too many microdrives fail after being dropped or knocked. Even the better quality ones don't like being knocked around!

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

09/04/2005 09:03:25 PM · #22

Originally posted by K-Rob:

Depends on the camera too ... this July, at the County Fair, I ran out of capacity for the first time, using two 256mb CF cards with my Canon S1 IS (3MP/JPEG) and 160mb SM cards with my Olympus (2MP/JPEG). Really the only reason I want a 512mb or 1gb card is to take longer movies; otherwise I'd rather use more small-capacity cards.

Message edited by author 2005-09-04 21:03:50.

Brent_Ward

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L USM

09/04/2005 09:08:26 PM · #23

I have 2- 1gb cards to trade back and forth, and one 4gb. I usually fill up at least a gig.