Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Memory cards

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 23, 2005 4:28:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Could someone please tell me the difference between smart media memory
cards and sd memory cards. Is there a difference in size, compatability,
etc? Thanks

--
Message posted via http://www.photokb.com

More about : memory cards

Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 23, 2005 4:28:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Pamela Bailey via PhotoKB.com wrote:
> Could someone please tell me the difference between smart media memory
> cards and sd memory cards. Is there a difference in size, compatability,
> etc? Thanks
>
VAST. The SM cards are an old, and MUCH less sophisticated media. They
are about 3 times as large, store much less (I believe they maxed out at
128 Meg), and are a lot more subject to damage. The SD cards come in
larger capacity, faster transfer rates, and are much smaller, thicker,
and the contacts are somewhat protected by plastic ridges. They are in
no sense compatible.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 23, 2005 5:32:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Smart media is about as thick as a credit card and has a relatively large
outline of about 1-3/4 X 1-1/2 inches. SD cards have a much smaller outline,
but are thicker. Smart Media format went obsolete 2 years ago. manufactures
have not used it in new camera designs.
John

"Pamela Bailey via PhotoKB.com" <forum@nospam.PhotoKB.com> wrote in message
news:ebfeffb26ee3483e8d12c76cc0a5c6a3@PhotoKB.com...
> Could someone please tell me the difference between smart media memory
> cards and sd memory cards. Is there a difference in size, compatability,
> etc? Thanks
>
> --
> Message posted via http://www.photokb.com
Related resources
Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 23, 2005 5:49:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I just joined this group. The best is the Flash Card. The pro model digital
cameras use it & I like it because it's bigger in size. I would not want a
camera with a really small card. The bigger size is less likely to be lost.
Camera manufacturers seem to keep wanting to go smaller & lighter. I want a
nice big & fairly heavy camera for stability too. The lighter, smaller ones
are to easy to jerk around and get out of focus images.

Craig Flory
Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 23, 2005 5:49:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Craig Flory wrote:
> I just joined this group. The best is the Flash Card. The pro model digital
> cameras use it & I like it because it's bigger in size. I would not want a
> camera with a really small card. The bigger size is less likely to be lost.
> Camera manufacturers seem to keep wanting to go smaller & lighter. I want a
> nice big & fairly heavy camera for stability too. The lighter, smaller ones
> are to easy to jerk around and get out of focus images.
>
> Craig Flory
>
>
I think you meant to say 'CompactFlash card'. They are bigger than the
SD card, and about the same area, but more 'squareish' than the SM
cards, and much thicker, and more robust than the SM card. I also find
them easier to handle. As for a heavy camera, you are welcome to it. I
am smart enough to hold my small, light, camera still.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 23, 2005 6:29:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 4/23/05 8:49 AM, in article
Jnsae.10524$yq6.2882@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net, "Craig Flory"
<floryphotog@mindspring.com> wrote:

> I just joined this group. The best is the Flash Card. The pro model digital
> cameras use it & I like it because it's bigger in size. I would not want a
> camera with a really small card. The bigger size is less likely to be lost.
> Camera manufacturers seem to keep wanting to go smaller & lighter. I want a
> nice big & fairly heavy camera for stability too. The lighter, smaller ones
> are to easy to jerk around and get out of focus images.
>
> Craig Flory
>
>
Then you'd love toting around an EOS-1 Ds Mark II with a 200mm 1.8 L?
I know I would.


_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
April 23, 2005 8:48:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
news:e3uae.14626$c42.335@fe07.lga...
> and are a lot more subject to damage.

I can vouch for that ;o)

Tip of the day: Don't sit on a Smartmedia card :o /
Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 23, 2005 8:48:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Gizmo wrote:
> "Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
> news:e3uae.14626$c42.335@fe07.lga...
>
>> and are a lot more subject to damage.
>
>
> I can vouch for that ;o)
>
> Tip of the day: Don't sit on a Smartmedia card :o /
>
>
When they were popular, there were a lot of sad stories about people
putting them in their wallet, and pulling them out in pieces...


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
April 24, 2005 1:04:42 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
news:WOuae.14929$c42.3649@fe07.lga...
> Gizmo wrote:
>> "Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
>> news:e3uae.14626$c42.335@fe07.lga...
>>
>>> and are a lot more subject to damage.
>>
>>
>> I can vouch for that ;o)
>>
>> Tip of the day: Don't sit on a Smartmedia card :o /
> When they were popular, there were a lot of sad stories about people
> putting them in their wallet, and pulling them out in pieces...

Not only do they look like wafer thin crackers, but they sound like one when
snapped ;o)
Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 24, 2005 1:04:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Gizmo wrote:
> "Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
> news:WOuae.14929$c42.3649@fe07.lga...
>
>>Gizmo wrote:
>>
>>>"Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
>>>news:e3uae.14626$c42.335@fe07.lga...
>>>
>>>
>>>>and are a lot more subject to damage.
>>>
>>>
>>>I can vouch for that ;o)
>>>
>>>Tip of the day: Don't sit on a Smartmedia card :o /
>>
>>When they were popular, there were a lot of sad stories about people
>>putting them in their wallet, and pulling them out in pieces...
>
>
> Not only do they look like wafer thin crackers, but they sound like one when
> snapped ;o)
>
>
If only they were edible, at least those with 4 meg versions could sell
them for something. Grin.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 24, 2005 3:39:21 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

They are also very prone to failure.

"JohnR66" <nospam@att.net> wrote in message
news:v7sae.631463$w62.96912@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Smart media is about as thick as a credit card and has a relatively large
> outline of about 1-3/4 X 1-1/2 inches. SD cards have a much smaller
> outline, but are thicker. Smart Media format went obsolete 2 years ago.
> manufactures have not used it in new camera designs.
> John
>
> "Pamela Bailey via PhotoKB.com" <forum@nospam.PhotoKB.com> wrote in
> message news:ebfeffb26ee3483e8d12c76cc0a5c6a3@PhotoKB.com...
>> Could someone please tell me the difference between smart media memory
>> cards and sd memory cards. Is there a difference in size, compatability,
>> etc? Thanks
>>
>> --
>> Message posted via http://www.photokb.com
>
>
Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 24, 2005 3:42:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I used about 20 x 32meg cards with a couple of S2Pro's on a job last year
and had about 5-6 of them fail, not good.

"Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
news:_4zae.19270$Ow2.6894@fe06.lga...
> Gizmo wrote:
>> "Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
>> news:WOuae.14929$c42.3649@fe07.lga...
>>
>>>Gizmo wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:e3uae.14626$c42.335@fe07.lga...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>and are a lot more subject to damage.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I can vouch for that ;o)
>>>>
>>>>Tip of the day: Don't sit on a Smartmedia card :o /
>>>
>>>When they were popular, there were a lot of sad stories about people
>>>putting them in their wallet, and pulling them out in pieces...
>>
>>
>> Not only do they look like wafer thin crackers, but they sound like one
>> when snapped ;o)
> If only they were edible, at least those with 4 meg versions could sell
> them for something. Grin.
>
>
> --
> Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 24, 2005 5:53:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Pamela Bailey via PhotoKB.com" <forum@nospam.PhotoKB.com> wrote in message
news:ebfeffb26ee3483e8d12c76cc0a5c6a3@PhotoKB.com...
> Could someone please tell me the difference between smart media memory
> cards and sd memory cards. Is there a difference in size, compatability,
> etc? Thanks

SmartMedia is limited to 128 MB and will never go higher than that, since
it's an obsolete technology and no camera maker uses it anymore. The cards
are about matchbook size and very thin.

SD (Secure Digital) is by far the most common type of memory card used today
in compact and ultracompact digital cameras. It's made by all the flash
memory card manufacturers and because there's so much competition in this
type, SD cards are often (in fact almost always) available at bargain prices
and/or with rebates. Maximum capacity is practically whatever you're willing
to pay for, up to at least 1 GB so far and will almost certainly go higher.
The cards are roughly postage-stamp size and reasonably thin.

I don't think there's any camera that accepts both types of card, so
compatibility in that sense is nonexistent.

If choosing between digital cameras in these card types, that's a
no-brainer. Go for SD, don't even think about a camera using SmartMedia.

N.
Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 24, 2005 6:21:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Nostrobino" <not@home.today> wrote in message
news:KJmdndgOQtCKQPbfRVn-3g@comcast.com...
[ . . . ]
>
> If choosing between digital cameras in these card types, that's a
> no-brainer. Go for SD, don't even think about a camera using SmartMedia.

Actually I put that much too strongly. I should have said, "all other things
being equal." But there have been many excellent cameras made that used
SmartMedia, and if you find a good one at a good price, assuming the 128MB
card limit is not a problem for you (and for many people that's more than
enough capacity), then there's no reason not to consider it.

N.
Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 25, 2005 3:26:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <D5uae.14645$c42.12972@fe07.lga>,
Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> wrote:

> Craig Flory wrote:
> > I just joined this group. The best is the Flash Card. The pro model digital
> > cameras use it & I like it because it's bigger in size. I would not want a
> > camera with a really small card. The bigger size is less likely to be lost.
> > Camera manufacturers seem to keep wanting to go smaller & lighter. I want a
> > nice big & fairly heavy camera for stability too. The lighter, smaller ones
> > are to easy to jerk around and get out of focus images.
> >
> > Craig Flory
> >
> >
> I think you meant to say 'CompactFlash card'. They are bigger than the
> SD card, and about the same area, but more 'squareish' than the SM
> cards, and much thicker, and more robust than the SM card. I also find
> them easier to handle. As for a heavy camera, you are welcome to it. I
> am smart enough to hold my small, light, camera still.

Yeah CF cards are a good size small enough to use but big enough to get
a hold on. My fingers are not precision instuments - 10 thumbs would be
an apt description and xD cards are way too small - I'm so afraid of
losing it I bought a 512mb for my Fuji so I wouldn't have to change it.
BTW the latest CF cards run to 10gb - try doing that with memory sticks,
Sony!

IMHO I think the future is in xD, SD and Compact Flash - all the others
will become the millenium 'betamax'
Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 25, 2005 3:26:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Stewy" <anyone4tennis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:anyone4tennis-BE6AE5.23260624042005@newssv.kcn.ne.jp...
[ . . . ]
>
> IMHO I think the future is in xD, SD and Compact Flash - all the others
> will become the millenium 'betamax'

I agree with that in connection with SD and CompactFlash. As far as xD goes,
that seems to me to have been a bad mistake on the part of Fuji and Olympus.
Both are excellent camera makers, but why the xD card for heaven's sake? It
offers no real advantage over SD, and I don't think any manufacturer other
than those two has any interest in using it in *any* sort of device--digital
camera, PDA, MP3 player or whatever. It's an SD world out there for most
such devices, with CompactFlash taking over the larger camera field. It
seems to me that this makes the xD card the "Betamax" of flash memory cards.

N.
!