• 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.

sandisk CF card

Aharami

Aharami

Lifer
bought a 512 mb CF card the other day. just arrived. put it into the a75 and was showing up 488 mb instead of ~512 mb. is this normal with CF cards? i know ur not gonna have exactly 512 mb, but it should be somewhere close...shouldnt it?

my last camera used smartmedia cards and i saw a loss of like 5-10 mb MAX! maybe im just spoiled from more efficent SM cards

did i just get a bad card? should i call up amazon?
 
i dunno? I have 256mb and a 128mb Secure Digital cards, each has a loss of maybe 2mb
i dunno if others with the same cards have this issue? if not then yes contact them
 
my 256mb San Disk compact flash shows up as 244mb in my Canon S500

Edit: BTW I ordered one of those 512mb San Disk Compact Flash cards from amazon the other day I'm still waiting for it to arrive.
 
If you read the back of the CF card package , it'll probably say something like 1 mb = 1000000 bytes, so theoretically, 512 mb = 512000000 bytes, which when divided by the actual amount of bytes in a megabyte, would yield ~488 megabytes.
 
I bought the same card from amazon this week too. My card also shows 487MB available (this is in a Canon S410).

In my manual for the S410, they show that a 32MB CF card has a usable capacity of 30.4MB formatted in teh S410.

512MB/32MB = 16, so if we multiply 30.4MB by 16 we get 486.4MB, or roughly 487MB of usable capacity on a 512MB CF card.

So there's nothing wrong with either of our Sandisk 512 MB CF cards... it's just the formatted capacity.
 
thanks for the explanation guys. i thought 512 mb meant 512 mb...not 488 mb. stupid companies and their stupid nomenclature

oh well...it was cheap. cant complain. now i gotta send in the rebate and keep my fingers crossed. ive heard some bad stuff about amazon rebates
 
Originally posted by: Aharami
thanks for the explanation guys. i thought 512 mb meant 512 mb...not 488 mb. stupid companies and their stupid nomenclature

oh well...it was cheap. cant complain. now i gotta send in the rebate and keep my fingers crossed. ive heard some bad stuff about amazon rebates
Click to expand...

It does mean 512 mb, it's all in the definition of mb.

HD's are the same way, it's amazing how many people STILL ask this question.

The bigger drives & flash media get the louder the bitching gets, you'd think people would have learned by now.

Viper GTS
 
they have only been doing this since about 1990 , maybe earlier

i think the 10MB and 20 MB winchester hard drives may have been base 2 instead of base 10 , but the marketing weasels sank their fangs into tech companies a long , long time ago
 
Originally posted by: Viper GTS
Originally posted by: Aharami
thanks for the explanation guys. i thought 512 mb meant 512 mb...not 488 mb. stupid companies and their stupid nomenclature

oh well...it was cheap. cant complain. now i gotta send in the rebate and keep my fingers crossed. ive heard some bad stuff about amazon rebates
Click to expand...

It does mean 512 mb, it's all in the definition of mb.

HD's are the same way, it's amazing how many people STILL ask this question.

The bigger drives & flash media get the louder the bitching gets, you'd think people would have learned by now.

Viper GTS
Click to expand...

sheesh. i know this issue exists with HD. but i only posted this question cuz in my experience with SM cards, they have yeilded memory capacities close to what the card advertises. so i thought CF cards would be the same...but apparantly not. i just didnt know this issue of false labelling exists with solid state memory as well

i didnt know CF cards mean 512000000 bytes when they say 512mb. in my world 512 mb means 536870912 bytes.
 
Originally posted by: Aharami
Originally posted by: Viper GTS
Originally posted by: Aharami
thanks for the explanation guys. i thought 512 mb meant 512 mb...not 488 mb. stupid companies and their stupid nomenclature

oh well...it was cheap. cant complain. now i gotta send in the rebate and keep my fingers crossed. ive heard some bad stuff about amazon rebates
Click to expand...

It does mean 512 mb, it's all in the definition of mb.

HD's are the same way, it's amazing how many people STILL ask this question.

The bigger drives & flash media get the louder the bitching gets, you'd think people would have learned by now.

Viper GTS
Click to expand...

sheesh. i know this issue exists with HD. but i only posted this question cuz in my experience with SM cards, they have yeilded memory capacities close to what the card advertises. so i thought CF cards would be the same...but apparantly not. i just didnt know this issue of false labelling exists with solid state memory as well

i didnt know CF cards mean 512000000 bytes when they say 512mb. in my world 512 mb means 536870912 bytes.
Click to expand...

umm... Smart Media cards you had were only 128MB so that's why you only saw the 5-10MB discrepency. Multiply 128 by 4 to get 512 and the difference gets multiplied by 4 as well. So if you compared a 128MB CF to a 128MB SM card they should come out to be the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top