View Full Version : Cowon PLEASE add a SD card slot into the A2 before release!!
Erasure4ever
03-27-2005, 03:37
I'm thinking of getting the A2 a few months after it comes out, but I wish it has a SD card slot built-in. This would be useful for transferring images from one device to another ie digital cameras.
USB-OTG is more useful for this than a SD slot I think. Besides, why SD and not CF, memory stick, ore one of the other million formats?
Erasure4ever
03-27-2005, 06:40
MS is expensive and sucks because mostly only SONY devices use it. Compact flash is too big and is outdated. Most newer cameras don't support CF anymore.
You could probably hook it up to an SD card reader through the USB on the go.
Huh? I've never seen a non-crap camera that used anything other than CF. But then, maybe I have a higher standard than most. A large benefit from supporting CF is that it also supports microdrives. In any case, I find even CF cards too small to carry without worrying about losing them, so I tend to just get one that is big enough, at which point the type of card doesn't really matter.
Erasure4ever
03-28-2005, 23:47
With the cost of GB SD cards coming down rapidly, who needs a microdrive? How much is a 1GB Microdrive? A 1GB SD card can be found for a measely $50.
You can't get a 1GB microdrive anymore. How much is an 8 GB SD card? Also, a microdrive has a higher sustained transfer rate than a flash card. Have you ever noticed the annoying wait while a picture is saved before you can take the next one?
A gig is probably enough for the ammount of pictures I would take on a vacation with my current 3.2 Mp camera, but I'm not thrilled with its quality, and that's also with JPG files, I'd rather the camera left them raw for me to compress later. I'll probably upgrade when a decent resolution becomes affordable.
Erasure4ever
03-29-2005, 12:26
Why would you need a single 8GB SD card for taking pictures? Unless you're a professional photographer your agument doesn't hold any water. If you are a professional photographer you wouldn't be concerned about buying multiple 1GB SD cards because 1. It's more reliable than Microdrives. 2. You can have many of them for redudancy. 3. They don't drain power like Microdrives do. 4. There are high speed SD version available.
I have a 4MP Canon S410 and with my $50 1GB SD card, I can take about 500 pictures at FULL resolution (best quality). I'd have to swap the battery before I'd have to swap or dump data of SD card.
erasure4ever....you seem to be holding on to the wrong end of the stick here. you do realise that the a2 will come wid usb otg? i hope you know what this means and how much it saves on having to create a slot for flash cards (as theres loads).
it just makes more sense, for design, cost and the rest of it just to have usb otg.
Have you looked at how much high-speed flash drives cost? I would also differ with you on reliability. Flash cards are very reliable if you only read them. If you need to write them a lot (you brought up professional photographers) they can wear out pretty quickly.
Anyway, you missed my point. I would need at least an 8Mp camera, possibly 15, to match the quality I am used to from 35mm film, and that's in my wifes el-cheapo viewfinder camera. I prefer my low-end SLR, but they don't seem to make digital camera bodies that are affordable for non-professionals yet. Also, I did say I wanted to use raw, not JPG, even at best quality.
Basically, the problem is that I expect more from a camera than you do, so SD is fine for you, but not for me. And as Taz said, the great thing about USBOTG is that you can plug in a card reader for any format and transfer files.
I am guessing people are looking to use A2 as a image viewer/storage thing for Digital cameras.. ?
otherwise i don't really see the need for card slots..
Erasure4ever
03-29-2005, 23:05
Have you looked at how much high-speed flash drives cost? I would also differ with you on reliability. Flash cards are very reliable if you only read them. If you need to write them a lot (you brought up professional photographers) they can wear out pretty quickly.
Anyway, you missed my point. I would need at least an 8Mp camera, possibly 15, to match the quality I am used to from 35mm film, and that's in my wifes el-cheapo viewfinder camera. I prefer my low-end SLR, but they don't seem to make digital camera bodies that are affordable for non-professionals yet. Also, I did say I wanted to use raw, not JPG, even at best quality.
Basically, the problem is that I expect more from a camera than you do, so SD is fine for you, but not for me. And as Taz said, the great thing about USBOTG is that you can plug in a card reader for any format and transfer files.
HDDs are not reliable ESPECIALLY when you're carrying it around while it's operating. It sucks battery power too. Anyone who is familiar with computer equipment will tell you this. As far as flash reliability well, how many times will you need to write to the card beyond 100,000 times? This is a camera not a PC where you need to write/erase hundreds of times in a single day. Like I said SD is cheap already. If you need 4GB then buy FOUR 1GB SD cards. Yes a 4GB Microdrive can cheaper than four 1GB SD cards, but it's not that much cheaper and that's not even factoring in redundancy. What happens when your single 4GB Microdrive decides to crash?
Like I said professional photographers who spend thousands of dollars on their equipment isn't going to think twice about spending as extra $150 for piece of mind and reliability. If you're not a professional photographer then you don't need 4GBs of storage in a single storage device. Also highspeed SD isn't THAT more expensive than standard SD unless you're talking about 80X write. If you're an amatuer that NEEDS 80X write speed then you have issues.
Regarding what I expect from a digital camera, well if I had a 8MP camera I'd still go with SD because even if I were to use the RAW format a single 1GB SD card would still give me about 100 shots. If I need more than 100 shots I'd use two 1GB SD cards, no big deal. If I need more then I'd just dump those images onto a cheap DVD-RW and erase the SD cards for reuse.
Anyway USB OTG is really neat and I didn't know the A2 supports that protocol when I first created this thread so thanks for everyone for pointing that out.
What's the difference between SD and CF? CF cards seem to be cheaper.
Aachenmade
03-30-2005, 20:34
CF-Cards are physicly bigger and have a completely different interface (IMHO IDE)....
i like memory sticks :)
main reason is i dont need any other format. before the complaints start rolling in, dont need to bother, i know already :)
Aren't memory sticks the most expensive one?
knee deep
08-14-2005, 04:32
why would you do that, the most you would get out of it is 2gb. Or you mean to transfer your pictures?
CF for me..cheap for me
darkninja67
08-15-2005, 16:00
CF cards are used by more pros since they can acheive higher write speeds from the dSLR's buffer to card. Microdrives are certainly cheaper than CF once you get beyond the 1GB point IMO. Microdrives are susceptible to failure since they have moving parts.
There are professional wedding photogs that use Microdrives as they offer the huge amounts of storage that they require., since they shoot RAW mostly.
What amateur would need an 80x CF card? There are a lot of enthusiasts that shoot sports and that is where you need a fast card. A Canon EOS 1D MkII will capture 8.3-85FPS depending on who you believe. That is a lot of information to write to card.
Do not believe me? Go here www.robgalbraith.com and check the CF database. See where MDs are on the list for most popular dSLRs. Microdrives have their place though.
SD? Well they have acheived 80x rates recently and is the future choice for media.
With a CF slot you could always get an adapter for the other memory cards.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.