Epson P-2000 or iPod Video

i think the prices are roughly equivalent. but either way, i might be going on a trip with my 20d.

all i got is two 1 gb cards (so 2 GBs total). which is better for using as a temporary place to unload my photos.

i prefere to shoot in RAW. how do these handle raw files?

I don’t own either of them, but I’ve played with Epson P-2000.
It’s a real beauty!

http://www.luminous-landscape.com …/accessories/P-2000.shtml

The Ipod wont read RAW files (it will store the file though), the P2000 will.

The Ipod is a much better media player.

The P2000 is a much better picture viewer.

The Ipod is much smaller.

Its really up to you to decide.

i would go with the epson myself..IPOD isnt really meant for SLR users in my opinion..i would prefer the epson 2000 display over the ipod as well

Not sure about the iPod, but I recently purchased the P-2000. I also shoot in RAW and the Epson handles them just fine. The only thing it won't do is zoom in on your RAW files, but if you shoot RAW+JPG, you can zoom in on the JPG file if necessary. You can also check histogram on the Epson, which I doubt you'd be able to do on the iPod.

cheers,
jim

does it take a while to scroll through RAW files or is it fast like the JPEGs?

iPod is fine for storage *if you already have one*. Don't buy one specificly for that purpose:
It's slow to transfer (512Mb card in 12-15 minutes with Belkin media reader)
Battery life sucks (6-8 cards with Belkin)
Display is not good.
No zooming.
No histogram.
There is a tread around somewhere about the iPod. I have one, but I would advise against it...

oh ok. thanks for the info and the links.

to edit my above question:
i meant on the epson p-2000, does is scrolling through large RAW files smooth and fast? or somewhat slow?

Viewing JPEGs is pretty slow as well. It was so slow that it annoyed me, and I got rid of my P-2000 in less than a week.

oh i didnt knwo that. unfortunately i cannot test one out so that is really good to know, if it is correct.

personally, i feel it's slow only initially. once the thumbnails are built and you've viewed the images, it's pretty quick. sure the iPod may display their images quicker - but you will take 10x longer to download then view on a tiny screen. ipod is great for .mp3. the new video one is not too bad for video, once you take the time to convert the content to iPod compatible mp4 format. but the screen is tiny compared to the p2000 (or even PSP for that matter). i've got video conversion down pat for the p2k - i can easily rip dvds from pc or mac into .mp4 which are playable on the unit. for pc, i use dvd2avi and virtualdub. for mac i use mactheripper and ffmpegx.

again for offloading photos from your 2 cards so you can continue shooting - and verify that the photos are stored - plus look at histogram,, etc.) the wins hands down over the iPod. for quick viewing of photos, listening to music, and ease of viewing movies (although small), the iPod is great.

My choice was the 80gb FlashTrax. The display isn't quite up to the quality of the P2000, but I only want to use it as a field storage device. The reason for my choice was the 80gb hard drive that should be enough for a lot of RAW photos on a month or longer trip.

I understand that Epson now has a P4000 that also has an 80 gb hard drive, but I haven't had a look at it.