Micro drive v. Compact Flash...

[Kokopeli]

Simply put, which is better????

[Peter_AUS]

Personally from what I have read and researched I will only by Compact flash cards. I have 2 x 256 meg, latest one is a Lexar 40X WA card, seems to work well for my needs at present. I would like a 1G card which would be a day or two shooting for me.

I have been reading about people putting 4G Hitachi Microdrives in their cameras and having problems with them from over 1.5-2.5G levels, getting corrupt files and rebooting the camera.

Also you can transfer images quicker from a 1G card to laptop or a image tank, have another card to fill while that is happening. I personally think for the price, the lower capacity cards are the way to go instead of taking chances with a 2 or 4 G microdrive crapping out.

Just my thoughts and probably plans as well.

[jekl]

As I understood, the Microdrives are much cheaper for the same capacity, at least they are here in The Netherlands.On the other hand they use some more energy, and are more sensitive when they fall, because of the mechanical/moving parts in it. The Compactflash uses no mechanical/moving parts. The new Compactflash cards are also faster than the Microdrives.
So if the price difference is no problem, I should go for Compactflash.

I hope this information is useful to you.

[another view]

Personally I'd go with compact flash cards. They're solid state, and microdrives are not. I've heard that microdrives are physically protected when they're in the camera, but are very fragile if you take it out to download. I haven't tried this, but there are plenty of stories of compact flash cards going thru the laundry, dropped in the lake, etc and they come out OK.

[Michael Fanelli]

I have been reading about people putting 4G Hitachi Microdrives in their cameras and having problems with them from over 1.5-2.5G levels, getting corrupt files and rebooting the camera.

The camera has to use fat32 formatting to go above those levels. Not all cameras in the past use this.

The other potential downside of a microdrive is that it can't be operated above 8000 feet or so. There is not enough air to float the head.

[Peter_AUS]

Thanks Michael, I forgot to add the fat 32 side of it, but was totally aware of that factor. As I build computer systems, I would hope I knew that already and I know you were adding that for everyone.

There are people ordering Muvo players seeling for $199US which have a 4G Hitachi drive in them and removing them and putting them into there 10D cameras. This is basically where some of the faults info is coming from. Cheapest 4G drive around. But I think a few people are going to get caught with slow drives, that may get faulty in the future and are prepared to take the loss of $199US.

[Kokopeli]

I appreciate y'all taking the time to help educate me.

[Peter_AUS]

Brian I have found the Lexar brand very good and without problems. Writes really fast after picture capture. What are your thoughts so far in reagards to leaning one way or the other.

[Trevor Ash]

What everyone said about microdrives sounds logical and makes sense. But when I read the posts it didn't sound like anyone had these actual experiences with the microdrives and is just repeating the "logical sounding" advice they've read themselves.

I won't disagree wit the advice either, but I would like to add my comment about microdrives. First, don't assume they're slower than non microdrives. They are slower on some, not all cameras. And some newer (and a lot of older model) memory cards still rank slower than microdrives in a lot of cameras. This is a perfect example of logical sounding advice not being correct in the real world. Check robgalbraith.com for measured results.

Also, I've been using nothing but microdrives since I've been shooting digital. I've owned 3 and currently own 2. I've *never* (knock on wood) had a failure with any of my drives and they've all seen plenty of shots.

That's my experience

[Pete]

The other potential downside of a microdrive is that it can't be operated above 8000 feet or so. There is not enough air to float the head.

Perhaps that's an urban legend. I've taken a number of pictures above 8000 feet with a 1 gb microdrive.

p.s. I've never had a problem with my microdrive but it is slower and more of a battery leech when compared to my 1 GB WA32x CF card, even though my body doesn't have the WA compatibilty upgrade.

[jekl]

I am using a 1Gb Microdrive for 2 months now. If I wanted a CompactFlash of 1Gb I would have paid double the price. That's the reason for me for choosing a Microdrive. If it turns out to be broken very soon, then it's bad luck for me, but I was aware of the possible problems with the Microdrive.
The Microdrive always stays in my camera, the transfer of the pictures to my pc is through the USB cable. In this way I lower the risk of accidently dropping the Microdrive.

And for the photography part: for my purposes it performs very good, fast enough. uptil now no problems at all.

Regards,
Jeroen

[Kokopeli]

I appreciate you weighing in on the subject!

[Kokopeli]

Brian I have found the Lexar brand very good and without problems. Writes really fast after picture capture. What are your thoughts so far in reagards to leaning one way or the other.

Well, from all the "research" I've done on this subject, I'm leaning towards CF cards. They are more durable than the microdrives and have no moving parts. As for brands of CF cards, I think Lexar and Sandisk are pretty close with Sandisk being slightly "better" in that their Ultra and Extreme lines write faster than Lexar's (60x v. 40x)

With that being said, I ended up oredering 2 Lexar 1GB cards yesterday when I ordered my new D100. The price was $10 cheaper AND there was a $40 rebate offer as well.

Thanks again for offering up your opinion!

[Peter_AUS]

No problem Brian, only glad to help. I have been pretty much at the heart of techinical stuff relating to most computer based stuff, building computers etc for 15 years. Most of the time I have found main problems to be with mechanical side of computers like hard drives. As the microdrive is a miniture hard drive, that is basically why I didn't buy a microdrive either. Accidentally drop it and it is more than likely unusable again. I don't have that sort of concern regarding Compact Flash drives. I think you choice of Lexar is interesting seeing you mentioned Sandisk being slightly "better", can only think cost factor paid the part in that as you said. Still I don't think you will notice the difference that much. If it is the WA CF cards can you tell me if they arrive with the new version of the recovery software. When I purchased mine it came with the older version, I believe the new version is much better, it is usually on the CF card it self.

[Michael Fanelli]

Perhaps that's an urban legend. I've taken a number of pictures above 8000 feet with a 1 gb microdrive.

p.s. I've never had a problem with my microdrive but it is slower and more of a battery leech when compared to my 1 GB WA32x CF card, even though my body doesn't have the WA compatibilty upgrade.

It's not an urban legend. I live in Colorado and emailed IBM support about a year or so ago to ask. They were very clear that the drives need enough air to float the head (look up how hard drives work) and that they have seen a much higher failure rate in states such as Colorado. They are the ones who gave me the 8000-8500 ft upper limit. If you don't need to use them at high altitude, it's not an issue.

You've been very lucky!

[Kugellager]

Sorry to bump an old thread but my question sort of ties in.

It seems that from most peoples experience and the general technological abilities of the comparison between flash memory and microdrives; flash memory cards are significantly faster writing than the micro drives.

I take digital photographs but also use my camera to take video on occasion and would therefore prefer a storage medium that can hold a large amount of images/video. I also realize that video formats are at a much lower resolution currently but much higher frame rate than when I take digital photographs.

My question is...are the micro drive write speeds adequate for most video uses and large format(10mp+) digital cameras?..and more importantly...will the write speeds be enough in the future when higher resolution video(DV format 720x480) and Digital photographic equipment becomes available in what are now primearily Digital photography.

John
];')

[swalsh19]

Seeing how these drives are FAT32, could one reformat the drive FAT16 to work in a camera that only accepts FAT16 media?

[Lionheart]

Microdrives are not worth the heartache when they go bad before you've downloaded the pics on them. I have two 1 G micros, and a 340. One of the 1G and the 340 died in-camera with photos still on them. The 1 G drive lived long enough to barely download the pics, but the 340 was doa. My remaining 1G sits collecting dust in a drawer somewhere.
Just my experience, maybe I'm just unlucky.

[malum]

Seeing how these drives are FAT32, could one reformat the drive FAT16 to work in a camera that only accepts FAT16 media?

Yes but if the drive is over 2GB then you will only be able to use 2GB of it (the limit for FAT 16)

[Sebastian]

Brian,

Both have their strengths. The way I treat my poor CF cards though, I would not trust a microdrive to last a week...

[Kokopeli]

Brian,

Both have their strengths. The way I treat my poor CF cards though, I would not trust a microdrive to last a week...

This is an old post (back in Feb) though and I ended up going with a couple 1GB cards. I appreciate your input though!

~B