24GB Compact Flash

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by cube, Jul 7, 2010.

  1. cube macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #1
    There are almost no 24GB CF cards. This would be the ideal size for BD-R, which is cheap now.

    The next good size would be 48GB, but 50GB BD-R is not cost-effective.

    8GB sucks. Dual-layer DVD is the most expensive of all.
     
  2. Eaton Photos macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2010
    Location:
    KY
  3. HBOC macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Location:
    SLC
    #3
    I always thought that flash media came in like 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, etc etc GBs. Burnable DVDs are cheap. I got a 50 pack Verbatims for like $12 at Frys'.

    Ignore the guys' post above me. Why waste your time "responding"?
     
  4. cube thread starter macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #4
    I saw at least one 24GB 333x CF but it's not sold here and I'm looking to get a 600x.

    Remember that it is usual for CFs to use several memory chips. Putting 3 instead of 4 is no problem.

    Even if you were to use 1 chip, there's no reason why the size could not have a 3 factor, instead of being a power of 2.
     
  5. Eaton Photos macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2010
    Location:
    KY
    #5
    I responded b/c the OP's post is pointless. Why question an Industry standard?
     
  6. cube thread starter macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #6
    Question what industry standard? Blu-ray?

    You're trolling.
     
  7. Eaton Photos macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2010
    Location:
    KY
    #7
    Negative. Your the one that is what is perceived as Trolling. I don't troll. I answer questions, that are legitimate questions. While this acct is a new acct with the forum, I've been around this forum for several years. And I'm also quite active on two of the largest photography forums on the internet. Don't call me a troll.

    Your questioning a medium/ standard that has existed long before Blu-Ray was even a thought. Technologically speaking, when it comes to Memory, Memory works in values of 2; as was pointed out 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, etc.... It doesn't matter if its KB, MB, GB, TB. Yes, when it comes to HDD's the numbers' add up differently. But your questioning the standard of space, when it comes to Memory Cards. And trying to compare to Blu-Ray. Why?

    Where does what Blu-Ray is being marketed for, dictate, that the Industry Powers' that Be, should change the standard? 32 GB is already becoming obsolete. 64, 128, & 256 GB CF cards are already in the works. As is the the next generation of CF technology.
     
  8. cube thread starter macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #8
    There are 3, 6, 12-core CPUs.

    There are CPUs with 3,6,9,12,24 MB cache.

    There are computers with 3,6,12 RAM slots.

    There are 3,6,12,24,48 megapixel sensors.

    There re 30,60,96,120,240,480 GB SSDs.

    There are 12GB, 24GB SDHC cards.

    There are 12GB microSDHC cards, but not commonly available.

    There are 48GB SDXC cards, but not commonly available.

    There are 12, 24 and 48 GB CF cards, but not commonly available.
     
  9. flosseR macrumors 6502a

    flosseR

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Location:
    the cold dark north
    #9
    I am sorry... but exactly what does all this have to do with digital photography?? Blue Ray? WTF? i understand why the OP is perceived as a troll. in the initial question, there was NOTHING about photography. Nothing about maybe using Blueray to back up your photos etc. nothing, just a random thought on 24GB CFs.

    And for the record.. 8G CF cards together with 16G cards are still used the most by Photographers... Having too many shots on on card increases your risk of failure..

    Security 101 :) Don't bank everything in one basket.

    My 2 cents...
     
  10. cube thread starter macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #10
    You can go to a store and transfer your card to a DVD for 5 euro since a long time ago.

    So, the 4GB of yesterday could be the 24GB of today.

    It doesn't matter if you could buy 6 single-layer DVD-R for cheaper than 1 single-layer BD-R.

    I always buy my memory cards according to how they fit in a commonly available disc.

    Maybe there are no Blu-ray kiosks yet, but I guess shops with a BD burner shouldn't be so rare now.

    4GB is too small nowadays. DL DVD burners should be quite common, but I think the media could be more rare than single-layer BD-Rs in the shops.
     
  11. leighonigar macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    #11
    The issue here is that the initial post was so sparse as to be meaningless unless you were the OP himself. So people went nuts.

    I know it's not ideal, but I suspect if I had such a longing to have 24GB of photos but had only 32GB cards I would simply swaps cards when the camera said I had 1/4 of the space left. I guess you could even format the larger cards as a 24GB volume and 8GB unpartitioned space if you did it on the computer (which I don't, and doing so would be a pain).
     
  12. Ruahrc macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    #12
    +1

    I was typing a reply and then I saw yours and you've said it better than I.
     
  13. Edge100 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 14, 2002
    Location:
    Where am I???
    #13
    This. 8GB is the biggest card I'll use.
     
  14. Eaton Photos macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2010
    Location:
    KY
    #14
    This is my last post, then I'm done with this thread. I thought I would share a pair of links with everyone.

    In reference to the OP's original post, here is the only 24GB 333X CF Card, that I could find via Amazon. Its made by Pretec, & Retail's for a whopping $599.00 US Dollars :eek:: http://www.amazon.com/Pretec-24GB-C...?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1278551530&sr=8-13

    If your willing to pay $600.00 for a 24GB CF Card, I have a few pieces of waterfront real estate, I'll sell ya. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

    But for comparison, here is a 32GB 600X CF Card. Its part of the Sandisk Extreme Pro line-up, and is sold for $315.00 USD @ Beach Camera: http://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-32GB-Extreme-Pro-memory/dp/B002P370AI/ref=pd_cp_e_1

    Echoing what everyone else has inputted so far, the largest cards I use myself right now, are 8GB Extreme III CF Cards.
     
  15. jbernie macrumors 6502a

    jbernie

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #15
    I am not sure of the benefit of buying a memory card to match as closely as possible the size of another media. Personally if I needed exactly 24GB I would just go to the 32GB card and know I have the 24GB I need and 8GB spare for just in case.

    If you are really using it just for video, I am not sure why you would want only the exact size when there is a pretty high change of needing to redo scenes to get it right.

    It is like buying a drink... even if you only need x amount of drink, if the larger container is cheaper, why not buy it?
     
  16. cube thread starter macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #16
    That's the whole point, that the 24GB cards are not common. If they were, many would be available for a good price.

    Panasonic, an SD and Blu-ray company, really understands this business and offers generally available 24GB SDHC cards at a good price.

    Not only you would theoretically have to pay quite a bit more for a 32GB card, the main problem is that you may miss the limit if you have to manually check, and that formatting the card out of the camera where it's used is risky, besides inconvenient.
     
  17. flosseR macrumors 6502a

    flosseR

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Location:
    the cold dark north
    #17
    i still fail to see the point... this is you venting about 24G CF cards.. great... people let's get on shall we?

    There is also the fact that SD cards are slower than CF cards.. so, if they would be faster more camera manufacturers would use them in their pro models and have more space for something else. But they aren't and the manufacturers don't.... great.. now what?

    geeez.
     
  18. cube thread starter macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #18
    Nobody is saying that SDHC should be used instead of CF because of the general availability of optimum-sized cards.

    If common 24GB SDHC cards are available, this would be much easier for CF, if the supply were working properly.

    Note that I understand that a 600x card might not be possible now, and that the current engineering possibilities could well top up at 450x.
     
  19. cube thread starter macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #19
    Note that although this situation would apparently be fixed for 128GB BDXL-R, it is not obvious that a 128GB card will actually fit in a 128GB disc. It might well be the worst size they could choose.
     
  20. flosseR macrumors 6502a

    flosseR

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Location:
    the cold dark north
    #20
    i was being sarcastic.. still waiting for RELEVANCE...
     
  21. goodscoolwf macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    #21
    hey

    I am really very curious abou what is you purpose of this post.:D
     

Share This Page