Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Reformatting CF Cards (Confused)

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
July 12, 2005 1:37:37 AM

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

If I have formatted a CF card for Nikon, can I now reformat the same card
for Canon????
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 1:37:38 AM

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

Yes you can. Not a problem at all.

You totally sound like a digital newbie--well, maybe not totally if you're
going from one type of camera to another. Regardless, no problem--we all
once were. Welcome (again) to the world of digital shooting.

Any more tips you need? Post away again.

LRH
"Faz" <chuckfaz@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:BEBAe.228364$El.86723@pd7tw1no...
> If I have formatted a CF card for Nikon, can I now reformat the same card
> for Canon????
>
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 1:37:38 AM

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

Faz wrote:

> If I have formatted a CF card for Nikon, can I now reformat the same card
> for Canon????

Both Nikon and Canon use Microsoft's 'File Allocation Table' (FAT)
file system. All cards come pre-formatted this way.

You don't need to format to use the card, but formatting in the
camera will remove files or directories that may not be commonly
recognized by both manufacturers.
Related resources
July 12, 2005 1:37:38 AM

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

Yes. You also can interchange them but I would stick with the specific
formats for each side.
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 1:37:39 AM

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

"Larry R Harrison Jr" <noone@noone.com> wrote in message
news:o KBAe.71005$go.4212@fed1read05...
> Yes you can. Not a problem at all.
>
> You totally sound like a digital newbie--

You "totally" sound like a teenager...dude...
;) 
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 1:37:39 AM

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

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 17:04:53 -0500, Jim Townsend <not@real.address>
wrote:

>Faz wrote:
>
>> If I have formatted a CF card for Nikon, can I now reformat the same card
>> for Canon????
>
>Both Nikon and Canon use Microsoft's 'File Allocation Table' (FAT)
>file system. All cards come pre-formatted this way.

"FAT" is usually meant to be Fat16; this limits the size of the memory
card to 2 gigabytes.
I *know* my Digital Rebel uses FAT32, and I would assume the other
cameras that will recognize memory cards larger than 2 GB do, too.
>
>You don't need to format to use the card, but formatting in the
>camera will remove files or directories that may not be commonly
>recognized by both manufacturers.
>
>
>
>
>
>

--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
funktionality.blogspot.com
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 3:13:24 AM

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

Bill Funk <BigBill@there.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 17:04:53 -0500, Jim Townsend <not@real.address>
> wrote:
>
>>Faz wrote:
>>
>>> If I have formatted a CF card for Nikon, can I now reformat the same
>>> card for Canon????
>>
>>Both Nikon and Canon use Microsoft's 'File Allocation Table' (FAT)
>>file system. All cards come pre-formatted this way.
>
> "FAT" is usually meant to be Fat16; this limits the size of the memory
> card to 2 gigabytes.
> I *know* my Digital Rebel uses FAT32, and I would assume the other
> cameras that will recognize memory cards larger than 2 GB do, too.
>>
>>You don't need to format to use the card, but formatting in the
>>camera will remove files or directories that may not be commonly
>>recognized by both manufacturers.

The D-70 can use FAT32 also. You have to do the initial format on the
computer. After that, the camera will recognize the FAT32 format and will
reformat in FAT32 automatically when you do an in-camera format. If you
put a FAT16 formatted card in the camera, the camera will do FAT16
formats.
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 8:07:26 AM

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

Faz wrote:
> If I have formatted a CF card for Nikon, can I now reformat the same card
> for Canon????
>
>
Yes, just put it in the camera, and select format from the menu. Note
that the format is the same, but a different file structure may be used
by the different cameras.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 8:09:12 AM

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

Bill Funk wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 17:04:53 -0500, Jim Townsend <not@real.address>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Faz wrote:
>>
>>
>>>If I have formatted a CF card for Nikon, can I now reformat the same card
>>>for Canon????
>>
>>Both Nikon and Canon use Microsoft's 'File Allocation Table' (FAT)
>>file system. All cards come pre-formatted this way.
>
>
> "FAT" is usually meant to be Fat16; this limits the size of the memory
> card to 2 gigabytes.
> I *know* my Digital Rebel uses FAT32, and I would assume the other
> cameras that will recognize memory cards larger than 2 GB do, too.
>
>>You don't need to format to use the card, but formatting in the
>>camera will remove files or directories that may not be commonly
>>recognized by both manufacturers.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
This depends on the camera, and model, and the size of the flash card.
Using FAT32 for a small card is inefficient, but then most people
wouldn't put a 64meg card in a Digital Rebel, I guess....


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 3:08:08 PM

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

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 04:07:26 -0500, Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net>
wrote:

>Faz wrote:
>> If I have formatted a CF card for Nikon, can I now reformat the same card
>> for Canon????
>>
>>
>Yes, just put it in the camera, and select format from the menu. Note
>that the format is the same, but a different file structure may be used
>by the different cameras.


You can format a card with a card reader in Windows if you want. I do
and use FAT32. Some have reported less data errors and loss of info
(pics) using FAT32 compared to FAT16.


This is from a Microsoft webpage about FAT32.

• FAT32 uses space more efficiently. FAT32 uses smaller clusters (that
is, 4-KB clusters for drives up to 8 GB in size), resulting in 10 to
15 percent more efficient use of disk space relative to large FAT or
FAT16 drives.

• FAT32 is more robust. FAT32 can relocate the root folder and use the
backup copy of the file allocation table instead of the default copy.
In addition, the boot record on FAT32 drives is expanded to include a
backup copy of critical data structures. Therefore, FAT32 drives are
less susceptible to a single point of failure than existing FAT16
drives.

• FAT32 is more flexible. The root folder on a FAT32 drive is an
ordinary cluster chain, so it can be located anywhere on the drive.
The previous limitations on the number of root folder entries no
longer exist. In addition, file allocation table mirroring can be
disabled, allowing a copy of the file allocation table other than the
first one to be active. These features allow for dynamic resizing of
FAT32 partitions. Note, however, that although the FAT32 design allows
for this capability, it will not be implemented by Microsoft in the
initial release.
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 3:08:09 PM

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

joe blow wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 04:07:26 -0500, Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Faz wrote:
>>
>>>If I have formatted a CF card for Nikon, can I now reformat the same card
>>>for Canon????
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Yes, just put it in the camera, and select format from the menu. Note
>>that the format is the same, but a different file structure may be used
>>by the different cameras.
>
>
>
> You can format a card with a card reader in Windows if you want. I do
> and use FAT32. Some have reported less data errors and loss of info
> (pics) using FAT32 compared to FAT16.
>
<< Snipped bits out >>

Back to the OP:

In spite of pages about file systems, what you can or cannot do with a
computer, etc. unless you are very versed in computers which your
question suggests you are not, simply format in the camera. And the
other stuff, fergeddaboudit...

--
John McWilliams
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 3:50:33 PM

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

"Bill Funk" <BigBill@there.com> wrote in message
news:23r5d19dcfhiethg4d29eqtjsjvj43tehv@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 17:04:53 -0500, Jim Townsend <not@real.address>
> wrote:
[...]
> "FAT" is usually meant to be Fat16; this limits the size of the memory
> card to 2 gigabytes.
> I *know* my Digital Rebel uses FAT32, and I would assume the other
> cameras that will recognize memory cards larger than 2 GB do, too.
>>
>>You don't need to format to use the card, but formatting in the
>>camera will remove files or directories that may not be commonly
>>recognized by both manufacturers.

I posed this question to Canon Support in regard to problems with reading CF
cards in my 20D. I was told (less than 1 hour ago) not to format FAT32, as
there had been problems with people formating FAT32 (with some models).

The recommendation was to allow the camera to do all formatting, in this
case FAT16, designated FAT on the 20D.

Dave
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 3:50:34 PM

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

In article
<42d33e10$0$5919$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>,
hyperoglyphe <hyperoglyphe@schlockmail.com> wrote:

blah...blah...blah...<snipped>

> The recommendation was to allow the camera to do all formatting, in this
> case FAT16, designated FAT on the 20D.

Just format the card in the camera and get on with it. What do you care
if it's FAT16, 32, or even HFS+? As long as it stores your images and
your computer can read it...who cares about the format?

Jeez, you people come up with some of the most moronic things to
carry on about...
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 3:50:34 PM

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

hyperoglyphe wrote:
> "Bill Funk" <BigBill@there.com> wrote in message
> news:23r5d19dcfhiethg4d29eqtjsjvj43tehv@4ax.com...
>
>>On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 17:04:53 -0500, Jim Townsend <not@real.address>
>>wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>"FAT" is usually meant to be Fat16; this limits the size of the memory
>>card to 2 gigabytes.
>>I *know* my Digital Rebel uses FAT32, and I would assume the other
>>cameras that will recognize memory cards larger than 2 GB do, too.
>>
>>>You don't need to format to use the card, but formatting in the
>>>camera will remove files or directories that may not be commonly
>>>recognized by both manufacturers.
>
>
> I posed this question to Canon Support in regard to problems with reading CF
> cards in my 20D. I was told (less than 1 hour ago) not to format FAT32, as
> there had been problems with people formating FAT32 (with some models).
>
> The recommendation was to allow the camera to do all formatting, in this
> case FAT16, designated FAT on the 20D.
>
IAE, you are better off formatting the card in the camera it's about to
be used in. When I have a card full and am sure I have them downloaded
on to the computer, I use format in lieu of "erase all". It's much
faster, and assures the simplest table/file system.

--
John McWilliams
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 3:50:34 PM

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

hyperoglyphe wrote:


> I posed this question to Canon Support in regard to problems with reading CF
> cards in my 20D. I was told (less than 1 hour ago) not to format FAT32, as
> there had been problems with people formating FAT32 (with some models).
>
> The recommendation was to allow the camera to do all formatting, in this
> case FAT16, designated FAT on the 20D.

You **HAVE** to use FAT 32 if you want to use cards over 2 Gig..
2 Gigabytes is the limit for FAT 16.
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 3:50:34 PM

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

hyperoglyphe wrote:
> "Bill Funk" <BigBill@there.com> wrote in message
> news:23r5d19dcfhiethg4d29eqtjsjvj43tehv@4ax.com...
>
>>On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 17:04:53 -0500, Jim Townsend <not@real.address>
>>wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>"FAT" is usually meant to be Fat16; this limits the size of the memory
>>card to 2 gigabytes.
>>I *know* my Digital Rebel uses FAT32, and I would assume the other
>>cameras that will recognize memory cards larger than 2 GB do, too.
>>
>>>You don't need to format to use the card, but formatting in the
>>>camera will remove files or directories that may not be commonly
>>>recognized by both manufacturers.
>
>
> I posed this question to Canon Support in regard to problems with reading CF
> cards in my 20D. I was told (less than 1 hour ago) not to format FAT32, as
> there had been problems with people formating FAT32 (with some models).
>
> The recommendation was to allow the camera to do all formatting, in this
> case FAT16, designated FAT on the 20D.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
FAT (FAT16) is not adequate for the larger multi-gigabyte cards.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 3:50:35 PM

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

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 23:52:05 -0500, Jim Townsend
<not@real.address> wrote:

>hyperoglyphe wrote:
>
>
>> I posed this question to Canon Support in regard to problems with reading CF
>> cards in my 20D. I was told (less than 1 hour ago) not to format FAT32, as
>> there had been problems with people formating FAT32 (with some models).
>>
>> The recommendation was to allow the camera to do all formatting, in this
>> case FAT16, designated FAT on the 20D.
>
>You **HAVE** to use FAT 32 if you want to use cards over 2 Gig..
>2 Gigabytes is the limit for FAT 16.

This is true for most practical cases, but FAT16 formats can
be created larger than 2GB - Windows XP will do this if you
force it to use FAT rather than FAT32 on a device larger
than 2GB. It achieves it by using a non-standard cluster
size which still works on Windows and on some other devices
that read the disk headers to fully determine the geometry
rather than making assumptions about it.

I used this to great effect allowing the use of 4GB
microdrives in a Sigma SD9 which is unable to use FAT32.
When formatted under XP the camera could read and write the
microdrive completely reliably but was unable to reformat
it.


--
Regards

John Bean
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 6:49:24 PM

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

"Jim Townsend" <not@real.address> wrote in message
news:11d6iocdcp1li2a@news.supernews.com...
> hyperoglyphe wrote:
>
>
>> I posed this question to Canon Support in regard to problems with reading
>> CF
>> cards in my 20D. I was told (less than 1 hour ago) not to format FAT32,
>> as
>> there had been problems with people formating FAT32 (with some models).
>>
>> The recommendation was to allow the camera to do all formatting, in this
>> case FAT16, designated FAT on the 20D.
>
> You **HAVE** to use FAT 32 if you want to use cards over 2 Gig..
> 2 Gigabytes is the limit for FAT 16.

I don't use over 2GB so don't know. I always format in camera and wouldn't
know what FAT? was. I took the opportunity to ask Canon Service whilst my
camera was being repaired.

Dave
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 6:49:25 PM

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

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 14:49:24 +0800, "hyperoglyphe"
<hyperoglyphe@schlockmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Jim Townsend" <not@real.address> wrote in message
>news:11d6iocdcp1li2a@news.supernews.com...
>> hyperoglyphe wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I posed this question to Canon Support in regard to problems with reading
>>> CF
>>> cards in my 20D. I was told (less than 1 hour ago) not to format FAT32,
>>> as
>>> there had been problems with people formating FAT32 (with some models).
>>>
>>> The recommendation was to allow the camera to do all formatting, in this
>>> case FAT16, designated FAT on the 20D.
>>
>> You **HAVE** to use FAT 32 if you want to use cards over 2 Gig..
>> 2 Gigabytes is the limit for FAT 16.
>
>I don't use over 2GB so don't know. I always format in camera and wouldn't
>know what FAT? was. I took the opportunity to ask Canon Service whilst my
>camera was being repaired.
>
>Dave
>

In order for a memory card over 2 GB to be read on your computer in
Windows, it must be of a format that the computer will understand, and
will address that much capacity.
Since cameras don't use NTFS, this means FAT32.
A Canon tech will *always* recommend that you do things the Canon way.
That's part of his job description.
Formatting in the camera is also a very reasonable suggestion.
It's possible that Canons will use FAT16 on cards of 2 GB and less; I
don't know.

--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
funktionality.blogspot.com
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 7:06:37 PM

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

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 11:08:08 -0500, joe blew it by writing:

> This is from a Microsoft webpage about FAT32.
>
> • FAT32 uses space more efficiently. FAT32 uses smaller clusters (that
> is, 4-KB clusters for drives up to 8 GB in size), resulting in 10 to
> 15 percent more efficient use of disk space relative to large FAT or
> FAT16 drives.

That may be true for computer hard drives having a good mix of
file sizes, with many being fairly small. With cameras having
typical image file sizes in the multimegabyte range, the supposed
efficiency advantage of FAT32 over FAT16 plummets from the claimed
10 to 15 percent to below 1 percent. FAT32 would present a large
advantage for people setting their cameras to 640x480 to take lots
of pictures suitable for web pages.


> • FAT32 is more robust. FAT32 can relocate the root folder and use the
> backup copy of the file allocation table instead of the default copy.
> In addition, the boot record on FAT32 drives is expanded to include a
> backup copy of critical data structures. Therefore, FAT32 drives are
> less susceptible to a single point of failure than existing FAT16
> drives.

That robustness is needed when the OS is Windows. When the OS
used within cameras is a multitasking variant of Windows it might be
time to abandon FAT16. But it would be far better to avoid such
cameras altogether. And some people complain about cameras that
take 2 or 3 seconds before they're able to take pictures, or an
extra second to clean the camera's sensor. Windows will allow no
pictures to be taken before their time . . . :) 


> • FAT32 is more flexible. The root folder on a FAT32 drive is an
> ordinary cluster chain, so it can be located anywhere on the drive.
> The previous limitations on the number of root folder entries no
> longer exist.

Irrelevant for cameras. Does anyone really want to use cameras
that boot from a huge OS located on each flash card? And of course
MS would want a fee for each and every copy used. If that came to
pass it might well end the "all eggs in one basket" argument used to
recommend using several small flash cards instead of fewer larger
cards.

IOW, FAT32 has advantages, but in computers, not in current
cameras or in any that we're likely to see anytime soon.
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 7:08:46 PM

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

Randall Ainsworth wrote:
> In article
> <42d33e10$0$5919$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>,
> hyperoglyphe <hyperoglyphe@schlockmail.com> wrote:
>
> blah...blah...blah...<snipped>
>
>>The recommendation was to allow the camera to do all formatting, in this
>>case FAT16, designated FAT on the 20D.
>
>
> Just format the card in the camera and get on with it. What do you care
> if it's FAT16, 32, or even HFS+? As long as it stores your images and
> your computer can read it...who cares about the format?
>
> Jeez, you people come up with some of the most moronic things to
> carry on about...
Randall,
Well it wouldn't do to buy a 4G card and format it FAT16 aka FAT. FAT
has a limitation of 2G. If the camera did have a problem with FAT32 and
you had a 4G card that would be a problem. If all you have is a 2G card
then it doesn't matter which FAT system to use. Hope you don't find this
too moronic. :-)
Paul
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 9:32:56 PM

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

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:06:37 -0400, ASAAR <caught@22.com> wrote:

> IOW, FAT32 has advantages, but in computers, not in current
>cameras or in any that we're likely to see anytime soon.

Except, of course, that FAT32 lets those cameras that use it to use
cards over 2 GB in size.
That's a fairly good advantage!

--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
funktionality.blogspot.com
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 10:53:21 PM

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

In article <XtudneBz06CmiEnfRVn-oQ@comcast.com>, Paul Schilter
<paulschilter@nospamcomcast.net> wrote:

> Randall,
> Well it wouldn't do to buy a 4G card and format it FAT16 aka FAT. FAT
> has a limitation of 2G. If the camera did have a problem with FAT32 and
> you had a 4G card that would be a problem. If all you have is a 2G card
> then it doesn't matter which FAT system to use. Hope you don't find this
> too moronic. :-)

If you put your 4GB card in the computer and it will only format it to
2GB, then you didn't read the documentation for your camera very well.
I guess you shouldn't have bought that 4GB card.
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 11:31:26 PM

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

Bill Funk <BigBill@there.com> writes:

>A Canon tech will *always* recommend that you do things the Canon way.
>That's part of his job description.
>Formatting in the camera is also a very reasonable suggestion.
>It's possible that Canons will use FAT16 on cards of 2 GB and less; I
>don't know.

Apparently they do. Worse, older Canon cameras (before the DIGIC
processor) do not even have firmware that understands FAT32. You can
format a 2 GB card with FAT32 on your Windows system, but these older
Canons will not be able to use it.

Dave
Anonymous
July 13, 2005 3:20:21 AM

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

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 17:32:56 -0700, Bill Funk wrote:

>> IOW, FAT32 has advantages, but in computers, not in current
>>cameras or in any that we're likely to see anytime soon.

> Except, of course, that FAT32 lets those cameras that use it to use
> cards over 2 GB in size.
> That's a fairly good advantage!

Well yes! But I was only responding to the advantages mentioned
in the Microsoft quotes. But you're right. It would have been
better had I said "FAT32 has advantages, but the ones mentioned are
only applicable in cameras . . ." instead.

Now if the camera's engineering team was nerdy enough to use a
simple OS such as a DOS clone, it could easily use FAT16 by
formatting 4GB and 8GB cards into multiple volumes of 2GB or less.
They'd still be perfectly accessible in any card reader, even in
older computers running Win95 that presumably wouldn't have FAT32
capability. That would actually be a nice feature to have. You'd
be able to quickly switch to a different disk volume, the way
current cameras using multiple cards switch from one to another.
This would allow easy segregation of pictures by subject or shooter.
(The wedding pictures I took are on drive E:, and the ones taken by
my sister the bride at the reception are on drive F:. My favorite
shots that I like to carry around and always have available to show
friends, acting as a portable photo album, are all on drive G:) .
When you've backed up and saved the pictures on your computer, you
could use it, or the camera to quickly erase or format drives E: and
F:, preserving your photo album on drive G:. Well, I did hint that
this idea might appeal to the nerds among us. Mea culpa. :) 
Anonymous
July 13, 2005 11:19:47 AM

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

"Dave Martindale" <davem@cs.ubc.ca> wrote in message
news:D b15qe$2vf$2@mughi.cs.ubc.ca...
> Bill Funk <BigBill@there.com> writes:
>
>>A Canon tech will *always* recommend that you do things the Canon way.
>>That's part of his job description.
>>Formatting in the camera is also a very reasonable suggestion.
>>It's possible that Canons will use FAT16 on cards of 2 GB and less; I
>>don't know.
>
> Apparently they do. Worse, older Canon cameras (before the DIGIC
> processor) do not even have firmware that understands FAT32. You can
> format a 2 GB card with FAT32 on your Windows system, but these older
> Canons will not be able to use it.
>
> Dave

Thanks Bill and Dave,

My 20D has been displaying Err CF sporadically and Canon are fixing it. It
is not card related. What made me pay attention to his typical techie
comments was that he claimed some users had problems when formatting FAT32
for cards used in some Canon DSLR's.

To give Canon credit where due, they have loaned me a 20D for work and I am
very grateful.

Dave
Anonymous
July 14, 2005 1:39:31 PM

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

Paul Schilter <paulschilter@nospamcomcast.net> writes:

> Well it wouldn't do to buy a 4G card and format it FAT16 aka FAT. FAT
> has a limitation of 2G. If the camera did have a problem with FAT32 and you
> had a 4G card that would be a problem. If all you have is a 2G card then it
> doesn't matter which FAT system to use. Hope you don't find this too
> moronic. :-)

IIRC, FAT16 only has a limit of 2G when using default blocksizes. I believe a
camera could conceivably use higher block sizes to get past 2G (in fact, I've
seen articles where you format 4G cards specially with your PC/Mac with FAT16
and larger blocksizes, and with some cameras that don't understand FAT32, you
can write 4G cards). I suspect most don't do this.

--
Michael Meissner
email: mrmnews@the-meissners.org
http://www.the-meissners.org
Anonymous
July 15, 2005 9:17:28 AM

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

Randall Ainsworth <rag@nospam.techline.com> writes:

> If you put your 4GB card in the computer and it will only format it to
> 2GB, then you didn't read the documentation for your camera very well.
> I guess you shouldn't have bought that 4GB card.

Some of the 4GB cards have a tiny switch that sets them to 2x2GB mode...

--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.
!