• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

People who own digital cameras...

depending on pixel size and format (jpeg vs tiff), you can run anywhere from 80 down to 15 images (olympus 3030Z).
 
At max resolution in JPEG mode, my 64MB CF card can only hold 30 images with my Canon PowerShot G2 (2272x1704 resolution). In RAW mode, it can only hold 20 images.

Time for a 128MB CF card or a Microdrive I guess.

Edit: At its very lowest resolution, it can hold 669 images. But I didn't buy this camera for those kinds of images!

Edit 2: My Canon PowerShot S10 use to hold about 105 images at the resolution I used (max resolution with medium compression). Upping the compression to max, that number would drop to around 40-50.
 
It really depends on your camera and it's compression settings.

My 2.1MP Canon S100 stored 84 pics at best settings on a 128MB CF card but my new 4.0MP S40 stores 67 pics at best settings. I thought it would be about 42 but it wasn't.

My 2.1MP pic size averaged around 1.5Mb but the 4.0MP pic size is about 1.8Mb.

It really depends on your camera.

If you have any questions you should go to DP Review and see what the compression ratios for that camera are like.
 
ok i have a question for you then...

i am looking at getting a camera in the 800 to 1000 dollar range... bt i need a way that i can hold around 100 pictures without downloading them onto my computer... i go to hocke games and i know i can use up 100 pictures easy... so i am thinking the only thing i can hope for is getting 2x 128MB cards along with the camera? but those things are expensive 🙁
 
Don't get a camera that uses Smart Media. Those cameras are not upgradeable with newer memory sizes.

I just got a 4.0MP Canon S40 for $650 and a 256MB CF card for $90 and I can take about 112 pics at best quality with it.

Edit: CF based cameras are all upgradeable to larger memory sizes.
 
DD is right. Cameras that use SmartMedia and Sony's proprietary Memory Stick have a 128MB ceiling. Some newer Sony digicams use CD-RW discs, but I always wondered what would happen if you bumped your camera while it was writing to the disc. Just doesn't sound reliable. Whereas with CompactFlash, solid-state memory goes up to 1GB I think, and Microdrives take that number even higher.
 
The diffference between SmartMedia and CompactFlash:

They are basicly the same except the memory controler chip is on the compact flash memory so that when the camera reads the card it just reads from the controler chip that reads from the memory. That means that you can have a 256mb compact flash card with any camera, but with Smart Media its different. Smart media contains just the flash memory and nothing else, so the camera itself has the controler chip, and if the controler chip cant handle more than 128mb SM card then a 256mb SM card wont work. The only way for a SM camera to read a higher capacity memory than its intended for is a flash upgrade. I think most cameras now have the option to just download the upgrade and do it yourself but most manufacturer offer a service that involves you sending them the camera, they upgrading it and then sending it back. Compact flash is more expensive than SmartMedia but on the other hand it offers more memory and more "support", also it is in a caseing so that it wont get scratched. Smartmedia is cheaper and is very very thin and it can take scratches.

I have a Olympus3030z camera that takes only Smart Media flash memory and it doesnt bother me at all. I have one 32mb card that came with the camera and then one 64mb card, which alowes me to take about 150 pictures in this quality.

One of the problems with digital cameras today is the write speed, if I choose much higher resolution than I normaly have it takes a while for the camera to write to the memory, so higher resolution is pointless most of the time.

Personaly, if you are thinking about buying a digital camera, think first of the quality of the camera itself and the price, the memory medium is not that important.
 
I have a Sony F707 5mp that only takes Memory Sticks and I have a 128 for it. It fits 51 pics on it at highest res.

I also have a Sony CD1000 2.1mp that takes the 3.5" CD-R's. I haven't had any problems with reliability with the CD-R Drive.

Sony announced they will have 1 Gigabyte Memory Sticks out by the end of 2002 that have higher data rates too so I am looking forward to that.

I just with the Sony would read Compact Flash since I think there is so much more flexability with its format. (i.e. Microdrives)
 
i definitely dont want a camera that will take a long time to write to the storage media... because where i will be using it most (hockey games), i might want to shoot images pretty fast, right after another... what specifications would i look at for this
 


<< i definitely dont want a camera that will take a long time to write to the storage media... because where i will be using it most (hockey games), i might want to shoot images pretty fast, right after another... what specifications would i look at for this >>


then you want a camera with onboard memory, mine has 32mb sdram.. though I´m not sure how effective it is. With that the camera takes a picture and stores it in the memory and then writes from the memory to the card.
 
Go to that website I pointed out to you and look for cameras with fast cycle times.

Remember one thing. The more you use your camera, the slower it'll get because the battery will run down.
 
Yes they are a little more, but no where near as expensive as they used to be. I can find 128mb sticks for $102 right now and I have heard the 1 gig will have an MSRP of $899. BTW, here is a pic from my F707. It is a 1.4meg pic at 3.3 megapixals.
 
Another note on picture size (can't believe no one has mentioned this due to his intended photographic subject). The size of the image is also fairly dependent on the subject of the photograph. If you are going to be taking alot of wide-angle pics of the whole rink, your picture sizes will actually be smaller than average, since the ice is a fairly uniform surface...it will compress nicely. However, if you start taking more close-up shots of individual players, the pictures' file sizes will be larger, because the subject is much more detailed.

Of course the difference isn't that significant on lower end cameras, but with a 4.0 MP cam, I bet you would notice that you could take a good number more pics that involved mostly the ice of the rink as opposed to player close-ups.

Good luck, and don't forget to check out Digital Camera Resource.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top