1 gig Kingmax 60x Platinum SD cards available...

[MrGone]

Go to NewEgg.com while they last!!
http://www.newegg.com/app/viewProductDesc.asp?description=20-155-264&depa=7

[MrGone]

Nevermind.. they're out already.. :mad:

[erkman]

even better

http://www.adorama.com/IDSSD1GE3.html

sandisk extreme III 1gb 20mbps read/write $114.00

[frumious]

Do you notice any speed difference between using the 66x Extreme/UltraII and using the 132x Extreme III?

[erkman]

Don't have it yet, so I can't give any details, my camera should be here today and the card by (hopefully) saturday

[jeisner]

I find the Tekq Ultra 60X, significantly faster than the Sandisk Ultra II in use in both my previous FZ20 and inn my *ist DS. They also testing 5 times faster in my PocketPC bechmarking program (Pocket Mechanic) by the way, both cards were freshly formatted before being tested.

I sold my Sandisk card wth my FZ20, and bought another Tekq card ;-)

[1SFG]

anyone see any deals out there for 512 high speed cards? looking to buy two of those as opposed to a 1gb card. would love to order them today so that i can have them in time for my trip to the detroit auto show next weekend.

[MikeCamp]

even better

http://www.adorama.com/IDSCF1GE3.html?searchinfo=sandisk%20extreme%20iii&item_no=4

sandisk extreme III 1gb 20mbps read/write $109.00

Isn't that a compact flash card and not an SD card? It says compact flash??


I found the proper link > http://www.adorama.com/IDSSD1GE3.html

The one you posted was a compact flash card not SD

[erkman]

thanks for the catch, I edited the post

unfortuantly now it says out of stock on the SD card :( (mine is in the mail however, I will post some results when I get it)

[erkman]

got the card, it writes the 14mb tiffs in about 1 1/2 seconds :)

[MrGone]

got the card, it writes the 14mb tiffs in about 1 1/2 seconds :)


You're saving images to TIFF format? I've read many people say that the highest JPEG setting produces the same amount of detail as TIFF. That they save space, and keep the amount of detail that TIFF would. Then when they transfer to the computer, save it as TIFF. :confused:

[indiawala]

About the last post...is this true about TIFF? Is this the way to conserve on space on the card while still holding onto the loss less TIFF format? Are there any experts who can truly answer this question. Should i be storing using the highest JPEG resolution and then when saving onto my computer then save it under TIFF? Please any help would be appreciated. Thanks

[jaynads]

About the last post...is this true about TIFF? Is this the way to conserve on space on the card while still holding onto the loss less TIFF format? Are there any experts who can truly answer this question. Should i be storing using the highest JPEG resolution and then when saving onto my computer then save it under TIFF? Please any help would be appreciated. Thanks

According to several reviews http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/panasonic/dmc_fz20-review/index.shtml (for one) and a few books I've read (Real World Digital Photography), the hi-res (low-compression) JPEG produces nearly indistinguishable images from TIFF. The book said to use TIFF as a means of saving on your HD. The only problem with this camera is that it doesn't save in RAW. The deal between TIFF and RAW is that your camera is 5 MP. However, for arguments sake lets say 1/3 of that is each red, green, and blue (there are actually nearly as many green pixels as there are red and blue combined). When you take a picture, RAW saves the brightness data from each pixel, rexulting in a 5 MB file (1 bit per pixel). With both TIFF and JPEG, the camera uses some calculations to determine from the existing but different-colored pixels what is missing from each color (since one red pixel is surrounded by blue and predominantly green pixels, it has to create the missing red pixels from that data). In TIFF, it then saves that data, resulting in a 15 MG file (1 bit per pixel X R,G,B). In JPEG, it goes a step further and compresses it. It does this by examining a 8X8 batch of pixels and deterrmining the "average" color and then bringing the highs and lows closer to this average, so that it can save less data for each bunch. It works to discard an unseen amount of data, resulting in a smaller file size. However, it re-discards information every time you save it resulting in color-fringing and artifacts (which appear square due to the 8X8 nature of JPEG.
Of course using RAW means that you now have an additional step (or two) in your workflow. However, since TIFF and JPEG are fairly identical in initial results, unless you're taking an extremely detailed and contrasty image, JPEG is the way to go.

[MrGone]

Very cool post Jaynads.. and informative! Thanks!! :D

[indiawala]

Yeah..Jaynads. Thanks a lot for clearing up the issue. At least not i can stop dreaming about the large SD cards and stop throwing away money at them. A couple of 512MB is about all i need and I already have those, so your explanation actually helped me save some much needed $$$. Well actually it didn't save it, it redirected the $$$ to other ventures...lol...all related to this damned FZ20. If my girlfriend knew how much thought and money i put into this camera she would be jealous, but luckily she just sees the results in the photos I take and absolutely loves this camera...albeit not quite as much as me...lol.
seth