Microdrives

Are microdrives faster than a 24x CF card. And what are your experiences w/ them. I still have the 16mb card the camera came with. I am considering buying a 1 GB IBM microdrive. If I leave it in the camera it should be ok. Just wanted some opinions.

I don't think the Microdrive will be faster. I compared it against the original 32Mb some time ago, but the Microdrive seemed slower. It was an impression only, I didn't time it.
But I think a 24x card should definitely be faster. But consider that this also depends on the camera, how fast it handles data transfer: the improvement could not be so large as you expect from the '24x' figure. A particular fast Flash card could perform much better on a particular camere, e.g. a D60.
I got the uDrive because it was about the same price as a 256MB card (only a few months ago...), but I think I 'd go for a faster 512Mb card now. I'm always a bit worried about shocks etc, after all it's a small harddisc.
I liked the capacity (about 250 RAW pictures) but to be honest I've never filled it more than half. Now I also use it to carry computerdata around (together with a USB 2 Sandisk reader --> cheap and fast!) between various work places.
If I have time (when...) I'll do a quick test for writing to flash and Udrive.

Microdrives are slower and more suseptable to damage than compact flash cards, whoever they are much more cost effective and as long as you dont throw it about it should be fine.

I have a 1gig microdrive and havent had any problems with it yet, and it has had a few light knocks.

I too bought a Microdrive (£180) and used it on my fortnight honeymoon - I took over 700 photos plus movie clips with it (size varied between L and M - but all superfine). I have had no corruption at all with it - whereas with a couple of 32Mb cards I have encountered corruption and lost images. The only speed issue was when it was almost full, it slowed down on playback but that was all.

For the cost (and piece of mind) - I'm tempted to buy another one.

Here are the facts.
Hope it'll help.
http://www.dpreview.co​m/articles/mediacompar​e/

Lexar 512 Mb 24x vs. IBM 1Gb Microdrives

Here is a site that has some test and comparison information that appears to indicate that the microdrive is a bit faster in write time. All of this performance card stuff still hinges upon the weakest link issue. That is that iff your camera cannot write faster than 4x or 8x then your investment in the "fast" card is not well spent. My personal opinion on the matter is that since the microdrive is an electro-mechanical device as opposed to the solid state electronic device then there is a bit higher reliability going for the device with no mechanics to get damaged or wear out. A 1Gb card of images is a lot to lose at once. I would rather deal with 256 or 512 cards for my own use. Hope the URL is helpful to you.

http://www.robgalbrait​h.com …ti_page.asp?cid​=6007-6011

Rick