does a 40x CF card inc. the speed when copying to X-drive II

[nucki]

Hi!

I was just thinking, because when I copyed last time to the x-drive it was very slow!
Does a i.e. 30x or 40x CF card copy faster?

best regards
Peter

[defordphoto]

They list download speed on their specs but not upload speed from the CF's the device. And it would also depend on what speed HD installed to so that leaves this question open. How long is long?

[evilenglishman]

--

[defordphoto]

They list download speed on their specs but not upload speed from the CF's the device. And it would also depend on what speed HD installed to so that leaves this question open. How long is long?

Download is when you transfer the contents of the card to the x-drive and when you copy the files from your X-drive to your main computer.
Upload is when you take a photo and it gets recorded onto the card.

A 52X card should copy to the x-drive much faster than a standard card. The x-drives hard disk does play a part but most drives are 5400rpm and have transfer rates of approx: 100 MBps/ 48.3 MBps

On their website they list the transfer speed as from the device to the computer. I read their pdf's. They do not list the transfer speed from the card to the device. I have the Xs Drive I and it has a 5400rpm drive in it. It does not transfer from the card to the device at 100 MBps/ 48.3 MBps. It takes 15 minutes to transfer a 1 gig card to the device so there is some huge bottleneck in there somewhere.

That being said I will be upgrading up to the II. The pro is too pricey and I don't need all that mp3 crap capability.

[evilenglishman]

--

[defordphoto]

Heh..We're looking at two different documents on the same site! :)

Anwyay, obviously the bottleneck is the Xs Drive as the card is faster than its Xs Drive) adverstised transfer speed. Question answered then.

[nucki]

Heh..We're looking at two different documents on the same site! :)

Anwyay, obviously the bottleneck is the Xs Drive as the card is faster than its Xs Drive) adverstised transfer speed. Question answered then.

well, thanks for your answers! For me, the speed of copying from CF to x-drive is more important then from CF to computer. When I'm in the field and have to transfer from CF to X-drive then it has to be fast.

so, I think I will try with an faster one and with a slower one and then present you the results!

best regards
Peter

[evilenglishman]

--

[nucki]

an intersting point ive just noticed.

Vosonic quote:

Download interface: USB 2.0 interface port
(Backward compatibility with USB 1.1)

Download Speed: Up to 480kBps (3.84MBps)

Looking at this, I now realise they are talking about downloading from the x-drive to your computer.
They do not mention from card to x-drive. So I guess this speed must come from the CF interface.
Does CompactFlash have a standard transfer rate?


I found this while searching at sandisk.com:

If you’re planning on shooting under extreme conditions, not just any memory card will do. You need extreme performance, and you’ll get it with SanDisk Extreme CompactFlash memory cards. With a minimum of 9MB/sec write and 10MB/sec read speeds, you’ll get every shot you want, no matter the conditions.

ok, this will be not the cheapest solution...

what do you think?

[defordphoto]

an intersting point ive just noticed.

Vosonic quote:

Download interface: USB 2.0 interface port
(Backward compatibility with USB 1.1)

Download Speed: Up to 480kBps (3.84MBps)

Looking at this, I now realise they are talking about downloading from the x-drive to your computer.
They do not mention from card to x-drive. So I guess this speed must come from the CF interface.
Does CompactFlash have a standard transfer rate?

Yeah, that is what I was looking at too, EE. That's the USB side of the drive. CF's transfer rate is limited by the card speed, but I suspect there is a bottleneck in the Xs drive somewhere as I can xfer a 1gig card on USB2 or FireWire in just a minute or so where with the Xs Drive it's 15 minutes.

And I agree with Nucki. The field transfer rate is much more important than dumping the files onto the computer.

So now I am wondering if it's even worthwhile upgrading the the II version if the field transfer rate isn't any better.

[defordphoto]

I found this while searching at sandisk.com:

If you’re planning on shooting under extreme conditions, not just any memory card will do. You need extreme performance, and you’ll get it with SanDisk Extreme CompactFlash memory cards. With a minimum of 9MB/sec write and 10MB/sec read speeds, you’ll get every shot you want, no matter the conditions.

ok, this will be not the cheapest solution...

what do you think?

I won't touch SanDisk cards.

[evilenglishman]

--

[CoolToolGuy]

The whole speed issue is (at least) a two-sided story.

Side 1. -The speed of the CF card is the speed at which it can deliver (read) or accept (write) data. 1x = 150KB/sec. So a 40x card is able to deliver 40 x 150KB/sec. (do the math or look it up).

Side 2. -The device to which the card is connected is the other side. There may be several 'standards' out there, but regardless of the card speed, if the device can only deliver or accept at a certain rate, that will be the limitation.

What is left is something known as 'wait time'.

Apparently, Canon is only now coming up to speed (pun partially intended) on this issue, as noted in the specs and features of the 1d MKII.

As mentioned previously, where you want the least wait time is a personal issue. I would rather have the fast speed in the camera, buffer or no buffer. I would also like to be able to clear the CF card quickly to the image tank (or whatever) as opposed to copying to the PC. Yes, I would like that as well, but I agree with the 'when I'm in the field' comment.

Hope this helps. :)

Have Fun
Rick 8)

[evilenglishman]

--

[defordphoto]

Well, personally I think it should all be instantaneous.

[CoolToolGuy]

The speed of the CF card is the speed at which it can deliver (read) or accept (write) data. 1x = 150KB/sec. So a 40x card is able to deliver 40 x 150KB/sec. (do the math or look it up).


But if the whole system is limited to 8mb/sec as is stated on the compact flash website, then there is no point in buying a card that claims to transfer at a higher speed as it is impossible for it to do it.

It's like saying i have an external usb2 drive that will transfer at 1Gb a second when the bus speed is 480mb etc

The dates on the Web site show that the download link is almost a year old, so that's old news. Plus, I don't think they control the specs, just one of the 'standards'. It's up to individual hardware manufacturers to build the hardware to perform.

I will agree that this whole issue is very confusing, and it really comes to the forefront as the 'resolution war' heats up. With Canon establishing 3MP as their 'floor' (for now, stay tuned), even the average snapshot shooter may become concerned. As I explained it to a coworker who asked me why he should care about card speed, (he is a baseball fan) 'If you want to get the runner going from first base to second base, no problem. But if you also want to get him sliding into second, a fast card may be the ticket.'

Please, before the buffer freaks take the stage - yes, the buffer will help, but you would need to be in multiple shot mode, and some folks may not be tuned into that with their A70s. Speed for the camera to the card will come - it may just take a year or two. :shock: :? :) :D :lol:

Have Fun
Rick 8)

[CoolToolGuy]

Well, personally I think it should all be instantaneous.

Geez, now we're mixing multiple hobbies with my day job :!:

There is an old statement attributed to racing - 'Speed costs money. How fast you wanna go :?: '

The technology is advancing. First in the 1D MkII, then it may flow to the prosumer class, then to the consumer DSLR class, then to the snapshot crowd. If Sandisk would have introduced an 8GB CF card 2 years ago, we'd all be :shock: . But now that there is a market, here it comes. The speed is coming. The buffer is not the final solution - they've got to improve the camera-to-CF speed as well. As the demand increases, the cost will go down, and we'll all have something else to complain about :)

Have Fun
Rick 8)

[theoldmoose]

To get back to the original question, the Xs Drive II is glacial when it comes to reading CF cards in the field. Going to a faster CF card in the hopes of getting the Xs Drive II to read it any faster, is in my opinion, a waste of money.

The CF card to hard-drive transfer rate of the Xs Drive II is its one glaring deficiency (well that, and the fact that its USB 2.0 interface has been unstable on my particular desktop system since day one, but I digress :wink: )