My crystal ball

[Rhys]

As I look deep into my crystal ball, the clouds begin to clear and I see Secure Digital memory beginning to replace Compact Flash. Historically, memory card formats have always changed every few years. Remember click? or Smart Media? Gone forever. How about Multimedia? Gone too - replaced by the faster higher capacity Secure Digital which mutated into HDSD. Compact flash is the only unchanged format.

Increasingly SD and HDSD have taken over from Compact Flash. The digital compacts changed first with Leica being the very first adopter. Then most of the entry-level dSLRs went over to SD/HDSD. Most laptops and PDAs now use SD or HDSD. Many of the professional level cameras take both SD/HDSD and CF.

In terms of size, SD is smaller and this is a plus and a minus. I can pick up a dropped CF card with cold fingers. I don't think I could say the same for an SD card.

As far as the contacts go, I see no points for or against either. The SD contacts are on the surface and can be kept clean easily. The contacts in the camera are just as likely as the pins on the CF card slot to get bent. The downside of the surface contacts is that friction can wear them out. I've seen worn out surface contacts. These however are all rare occurrences. I don't often drop memory cards. I'm more likely to drop my mobile phone than anything else as my fingers tend to be dry these days.

[fotogmarc]

I agree, looks like SDHC is taking the high spot. After Canon's XSi being SD only there's a good chance others will follow.
I have no experience with the SDHC, but the SD is very slow to download images. Which leads me to ask about speeds. SDHC class 6 is pretty much the fastest card made, rated at 6mb/s, how can you even compare this to CF when they are rated at 20 and 40 mb/s?

[Rooz]

but the SD is very slow to download images. Which leads me to ask about speeds?

is that really true ? :confused: isnt that more to do with the card reader ? i have personally found that my previous SD card downloaded faster than my current CF. my image files are much larger now so that explains some of the slow down speed which brings them pretty much even.

i'll take SD over CF anyday of the week. cold hands. please. :rolleyes:

[TheObiJuan]

My new laptop has a 5-in-one reader built-in. No CF support!
This alone was a telling sign for me-Canon only reassured that.

[Paradox]

My new laptop has a 5-in-one reader built-in. No CF support!
This alone was a telling sign for me-Canon only reassured that.

Ditto - Which means irritatingly I'll have to buy an external reader for my new CF-carded 40D. :p

[TheObiJuan]

I would have loved to have both slots available.
This would have been ideal.
Good thing I only have a couple of gigs in CF.

[K1W1]

The SD format was jointly developed by Panasonic, Toshiba and San Disk to overcome what those companies saw as issues with what was then the standard - CF.
The issues from memory were (remember that we are talking some 6 years ago now);
CF is too large physically for new generation products.
CF was never designed as a medium for portable storage. The pins are too fragile and easily damaged when cards are constantly inserted and removed.
There is no capacity to shrink the CF format for even smaller devices (mobile phones for example).
CF requires to much power consumption for new generation products.
CF cards have no write protect ability

At the time Sony were approached to join the consortium developing SD but declined as Sony do and developed the rival and largely unsupported Memory Stick format.

So what the OP is saying is largely correct. it's just that he has taken about 6 years to work out what the industry has known all along. SD is specifically designed to replace CF and will ultimately do so.

BTW.
The reason Leica introduced SD early is simply that their cameras are largely designed and built by Panasonic.

[The Mangler]

Doesn't CF have higher capacity and faster write speeds than SD though?

[TheObiJuan]

From what I've read, SDHC is comparable.

[SpecialK]

SDHC class 6 is pretty much the fastest card made, rated at 6mb/s

That is the Class "minimum". Some are faster.

[Rhys]

Doubtless new classes will be introduced.

Until then it might be a good idea for people to get SD cards and the CF-SD adaptor. That way we can use the next generation of cards in our current generation cameras.

I don't know whether the adaptor has a spring lock/release as the normal SD card slots do. Anybody tried one?

I'm fairly happy with CF but I would not be surprised to see it going the way of the Dodo.

[K1W1]

Until then it might be a good idea for people to get SD cards and the CF-SD adaptor. That way we can use the next generation of cards in our current generation cameras.

Memory is so cheap why bother? It's only one more thing in the chain to break or get lost or slow things down.

The "next generation" you refer to will not be either SD or CF or anything that is on the market at the moment anyway. SD and CF are both current generation. The correct analogy is floppy dics. CF are 5 1/4" 1.2MB discs - they died around 1994. SD is 3.5" 1.44MB discs - they lasted until the late 1990's. Both were replaced by CD's. CD's have now been replaced by DVD's and DVD's themselves are on the edge of extinction.

Yes, for what it's worth the SD/CF adapters I have seen have the spring release (it's part of the SD standard) but as I said earlier I wouldn't bother.

[TheObiJuan]

Great analogy!
Geez I remember those days.... :o

[fotogmarc]

The prices are confusing. Right now the SDHC is cheaper per GB than the CF. When you consider the highest speed cards.

I tried an experiment I compared download speed of the SD card I got with my camera to the CF card also came with the camera. The CF was twice as fast. As both are part of the kit they would be slower cards (no speed indicated), why do people find SD faster? Tell me what criteria they are using.

Still USB memory sticks, thumbdrives, plug in memory are still by far cheaper than any memory card.
Is it beacause photographers are always willing to pay more for items related to photography?

[Rhys]

The prices are confusing. Right now the SDHC is cheaper per GB than the CF. When you consider the highest speed cards.

I tried an experiment I compared download speed of the SD card I got with my camera to the CF card also came with the camera. The CF was twice as fast. As both are part of the kit they would be slower cards (no speed indicated), why do people find SD faster? Tell me what criteria they are using.

Still USB memory sticks, thumbdrives, plug in memory are still by far cheaper than any memory card.
Is it beacause photographers are always willing to pay more for items related to photography?

I can buy a pair of jeans made by Levis for the Russian market for $15. I can buy the same pair of jeans made for the British market for $80. Same pair of jeans - same quality. Manufacturers charge what the market will stand.

I'd like to see the battery grips modified so they can take standard USB memory sticks. I know they're limited at USB 2.0 to 480mbps (57 MBps) but even that is faster than most flash media.

[BLWNHR]

One thing to remember though is CF has the controller for the card IN the card. What does this mean?

Notice how we have moved to SDHC, this is because SD size was capped at 4Gb. SDHC devices can handle SDHC & SD, but SD only devices cannot handle SDHC.

Now take CF, these have the controller built in so the capacity of the card is unlimited and the device in which it is being installed is irrelevant. A 5 year old DSLR that came out when 1Gb cards were huge and 16Gb were a pipe-dream will still function correctly with either card.

The same cannot be said for SD. Don't get me wrong, I like the size and convenience of SD, but this is a major plus for CF in my book.

[SONYNUT]

I Washed And Dried One Of My Cf Cards...and It Still Works Fine!!!!!!!!!!!