If a photo in the camera, (let us assume a four pixel camera, yeah absurd but useful for illustration purposes) the acquired four pixels of data are these
- 11000011010101
- 11000011011101
- 11000011110101
- 11000111010101
CF vs. SD merely is a distinction of
how 'bits' are grouped when going in/out of the memory card, that's all. Bits get sent to CF in groups of eight (parallel transfer), bits get sent to SD as a string of single bits (serial transfer).
(aside: Does that give you insight why a Canon is faster in storing a photo to CF than it can when storing the same photo in SD?!)
the camera sends that string of 'bits' of data, 8 bits at a time, to a CF card...
11000011 01010111 00001101 11011100 00111101 01110001 11010101
or the camera sends those same string of bits, ONE bit at a time, to an SD card...
1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
Later, in your computer you can transfer data from a CF card to an SD card...
11000011 01010111 00001101 11011100 00111101 01110001 11010101,
1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
or vice versa, but apart from how the bits are grouped (or not), it is the same string of bits.
Therefore there is ZERO implication on the 'image quality due to which device stores the photo within a camera, just as there is ZERO implication on the image quality caused by transferring the photos between SD and CF using the computer.