Is there a reason for not going SD?

[delhi]

I find CF cards a bit chunky after having used SD cards on my other peripherals. I like to know that Canon has made cameras using SDs why can't they adopt it for their DSLR line (sans 1D)? Are there any inherent characteristics of the CF that an SD card can't provide which a dSLR requires?

[yenoram]

I don't know the answer to your question but, personally, I like the size of CFs - I find SDs too small to handle with confidence.

[AutoXer]

Interesting question, delhi. Neither has an effect on the image, so the propensity for makers of SERIOUS cameras to use CF is likely based on the fact that CF was the first to have larger amounts of storage on them, so pro cameras adopted them. Also, while I know of no test proving one way or another, some of the stories I've heard and read of the abuse a CF card took and it still worked MAY mean they are slightly more durable, and again that would be a pro's desire. But I can think of one definite reason I HOPE the CF cards continue to be the card of choice - the tiny little SD cards are an absolute pain for me to use in the one item I have that uses them, despite the fact that I am reasonably dexterious. They are simply too small and too hard FOR ME to work in fast-changing conditions. I can't imagine how difficult it is to use the even smaller cards out there (I wonder how many get dropped, lost, etc. while being changed?). I know it may be my particular hang-up, but I for one hope pro and serious cameras never go SD.

Jim

[delhi]

Well with SD one would never have to worry about bent pins. While I agree SD is fairly small and in the heat of some serious photoshooting can be a pain, the fact it's smaller = lighter weight too. Some pros and cons.
For me I find SD has been consistently cheaper than CF in my location.

BTW, welcome AutoXer. I used to do Solo II too. Then had to trade in my 2.5RS coupe for a family wagon.... :(

[yendikeno]

Personal preference I guess, and like the other posters I prefer handling the larger CF cards. For me, easier to use and not as easy to drop/lose. :)

[malla1962]

1dmk2 uses both.:D

[blonde]

i use both in mind but the SD is for back up only!!! last winter i was shooting in the snow with some thick gloves and there is no way in hell i would be able to change the SD card. changing the CF was a breeze due to the size and i have NEVER had any problems with bent pins.. as for the weight, both are pretty much insignificant IMHO...

[malla1962]

i use both in mind but the SD is for back up only!!! last winter i was shooting in the snow with some thick gloves and there is no way in hell i would be able to change the SD card. changing the CF was a breeze due to the size and i have NEVER had any problems with bent pins.. as for the weight, both are pretty much insignificant IMHO...Do you just change to the SD when the CF card is full?Or shoot to both.:D

[blonde]

i shoot to the CF all the time. the only time i will shoot to the SD is when the CF is full and than i will take it out and keep shooting on the SD. the nice thing about it is the i have 6GB in my camera at all times :)

[AutoXer]

delhi is correct on the bent pin issue, but with two cameras with CF and several years of use I have suffered no bent pins. Honestly, I never figured out what kind of ham-fisted abuse a person has to commit to bend a pin. I may be changing the cards fast, but I still slow down when doing the actual insertion. OF course, it'd be darn nice if all the manufacturers standardized on whether the label on the CF card faces you or away from you ... maybe inserting it backward is how a pin gets bent?

JimZ

[Jon]

I agree - it's not easy to bend the pins on your CF socket - I've been popping cards into and out of PC Card and CF slots on computers, PDAs and cameras for years without problems. And the SD cards are just too small to work with in the field, especially if you're wearing gloves. Weight's not an issue - What's a CF card weigh? An ounce?

[lakiluno]

I'd say that in a field where people use huge cameras (aka 1D size) the size of the memory card doesn't matter, and larger memory cards are easier to use.

If pro cameras ever went SD, they should make magazines with 4 cards to slot in so that you have something decent sized to grab. SD may make sense for the small cameras, but for DSLRs it wouldn't have a size advantage.

I would think that probably the main reason is that professional DSLR users probably make up most of the high end memory market (4GB+), and CF cards can go to higher sizes with the same level of technology, simply because they are bigger. A lot of pros will also have large amounts of money invested in memory (when you have 12+GB of memory your talking $500+) and so switching to SD would mean a major replacement of all their memory.

Leo

[steved110]

My fujifilm P&S has an xD card which makes a CF card look like a shoebox. It's a real fiddle doing anything with it - tho to be honest I hardly ever use this camera now - and i have to admit i prefer the solidity of a CF card. the CF cards are supposed to be extrememly durable, the xD would crumple if you mishandled it.

[Longwatcher]

I am also one of those that prefers CF cards to SD cards for any application where I will be handling the card frequently (such as my camera). For a device where I am rarely changing the card out then I find no issues with the SD cards.

The reasons are:
- The CF cards should be able to take more abuse (I have washed a card and soaked it in the river and it still works)
- CF cards are easier for my big hands to handle.
- I don't know when the physics limits will be hit for flash memory, but the CF card format should in theory be able to continue to hold more in the long run. This is a minor issue as I gather we have a long way to go to hit the physics limits on flash memory.
- CF cards are still coming out cheaper per GB then SD cards.

On the flip side, I really like the Sandisk USB capable SD card concept, although I have not seen a really good reason for me to get one yet. And I have both in my camera, but if both slots were CF I would have liked it even better.

- one possible boon for SD cards is apparently there is some reason they are better for verification kits to use then CF cards. I am guessing it has something to do with the standards established more then the actual physical properties.

Since I can use both, I will, but I prefer the using the CF card more. SD cards are just too small for my taste.

[Lord_Malone]

I use both. At first I was using the SD card for split recording, now I use it as extra memory for when my CF card gets full. I don't have any hang-ups about using either card.

[Coco-Puffs]

there are adaptors too.

[DavidW]

One issue not mentioned so far in this thread is that SD has an architectural limit at 2GB. There is an SD HC standard emerging that breaks the 2GB barrier, but existing equipment isn't SD HC compatible. There are some non-SD HC cards around that are supposedly 4GB, but I'm not sure about compatibility and precisely how they get around the limit.

I think CompactFlash is the best format for DSLR type cameras. Huge cards and microdrives are possible far more easily than in SD. I do use SD in Pocket PCs and compact cameras - indeed, I own more SD cards than CompactFlash.

However, the world is moving to smaller and smaller memory card formats. PDAs with CompactFlash support seem to be disappearing, which is a nuisance for me as a heavy PDA user (there again, there's nothing wrong with my iPAQ hx4700; I don't intend to upgrade it for a while). I think this one sits rather finely balanced - I wouldn't mind seeing SD HC support alongside CompactFlash on future Canon DSLRs at all price points.



David