Recommeded memory speed for supercompact?

If I get a modern super-compact digital camera such as a mid-range Canon
IXUS (US: Canon Powershot) for general use then ...

.... what minimum speed of SD memory should I get to avoid delays?

I see "x133" mentioned a lot on memory adverts. Is x133 fast, slow,
just right for the sort of camera I am thing of?

I would probably get 1GB or 2 GB from this sto
http://www.jacobsdigital.co.uk/index...uery=sd+memory










--

PC memory readers at alt.comp.hardware
rec.photo.digital + alt.photography

Joey wrote:
If I get a modern super-compact digital camera such as a mid-range Canon
IXUS (US: Canon Powershot) for general use then ...

... what minimum speed of SD memory should I get to avoid delays?

I see "x133" mentioned a lot on memory adverts. Is x133 fast, slow,
just right for the sort of camera I am thing of?

I would probably get 1GB or 2 GB from this sto
http://www.jacobsdigital.co.uk/index...uery=sd+memory


I don't believe the fact that it's a supercompact is relevant.

The question is whether the camera can use it at all, but if it's recent there
should be no reason why not.

Realistically, you'll probably find no speed difference between a 40x and 133x
card. If you buy based on the size and price rather than speed you'll
typically end up with a fast (say, 133x) card anyway.

Beware that not all cameras can access cards bigger than 2GB as they don't all
use FAT-32.

"Richard Polhill" wrote in message
. ..
Joey wrote:
If I get a modern super-compact digital camera such as a mid-range Canon
IXUS (US: Canon Powershot) for general use then ...

... what minimum speed of SD memory should I get to avoid delays?

I see "x133" mentioned a lot on memory adverts. Is x133 fast, slow, just
right for the sort of camera I am thing of?

I would probably get 1GB or 2 GB from this sto
http://www.jacobsdigital.co.uk/index...uery=sd+memory


I don't believe the fact that it's a supercompact is relevant.

The question is whether the camera can use it at all, but if it's recent
there should be no reason why not.

The speed rating of the memory is its maximum speed, so if the camera can't
go that fast, then the memory will run at less than top speed, so don't
worry about compatability due to speed.

Compatability due to size of memory card may be an issue though - see
Richard's last line below

Realistically, you'll probably find no speed difference between a 40x and
133x card. If you buy based on the size and price rather than speed you'll
typically end up with a fast (say, 133x) card anyway.

Not true. It depends on what the camera is capable of - fast frame shooting
will benefit greatly from faster memory, but I don't know how many frames
per second this camera can do.

Beware that not all cameras can access cards bigger than 2GB as they don't
all use FAT-32.

"Joey" wrote in message
...
If I get a modern super-compact digital camera such as a mid-range Canon
IXUS (US: Canon Powershot) for general use then ...

... what minimum speed of SD memory should I get to avoid delays?

I see "x133" mentioned a lot on memory adverts. Is x133 fast, slow,
just right for the sort of camera I am thing of?

x133 is medium to fast. However, how many shots can the camera take in a
second? If you were looking at an SLR with 2 or more frames per second, then
memory speed starts to become an issue, but if the camera can only shoot 1
frame per second, then memory speed doesn't really matter.

On 8 Haziran, 11:52, Joey wrote:
If I get a modern super-compact digital camera such as a mid-range Canon
IXUS (US: Canon Powershot) for general use then ...

... what minimum speed of SD memory should I get to avoid delays?

I see "x133" mentioned a lot on memory adverts. Is x133 fast, slow,
just right for the sort of camera I am thing of?

I would probably get 1GB or 2 GB from this stohttp://www.jacobsdigital.co.uk/index...uery=sd+memory

--

PC memory readers at alt.comp.hardware
rec.photo.digital + alt.photography

GT wrote:
"Richard Polhill" wrote in message
. ..
Joey wrote:
If I get a modern super-compact digital camera such as a mid-range Canon
IXUS (US: Canon Powershot) for general use then ...

... what minimum speed of SD memory should I get to avoid delays?

I see "x133" mentioned a lot on memory adverts. Is x133 fast, slow, just
right for the sort of camera I am thing of?

I would probably get 1GB or 2 GB from this sto
http://www.jacobsdigital.co.uk/index...uery=sd+memory

I don't believe the fact that it's a supercompact is relevant.

The question is whether the camera can use it at all, but if it's recent
there should be no reason why not.

The speed rating of the memory is its maximum speed, so if the camera can't
go that fast, then the memory will run at less than top speed, so don't
worry about compatability due to speed.

Compatability due to size of memory card may be an issue though - see
Richard's last line below

Realistically, you'll probably find no speed difference between a 40x and
133x card. If you buy based on the size and price rather than speed you'll
typically end up with a fast (say, 133x) card anyway.

Not true. It depends on what the camera is capable of - fast frame shooting
will benefit greatly from faster memory, but I don't know how many frames
per second this camera can do.

Not if the camera cannot write at 133x, and AFAIK most can't.


Beware that not all cameras can access cards bigger than 2GB as they don't
all use FAT-32.

wrote:
On 8 Haziran, 11:52, Joey wrote:
If I get a modern super-compact digital camera such as a mid-range Canon
IXUS (US: Canon Powershot) for general use then ...

... what minimum speed of SD memory should I get to avoid delays?

I see "x133" mentioned a lot on memory adverts. Is x133 fast, slow,
just right for the sort of camera I am thing of?

I would probably get 1GB or 2 GB from this stohttp://www.jacobsdigital.co.uk/index...uery=sd+memory

--

PC memory readers at alt.comp.hardware
rec.photo.digital + alt.photography


It's like he's trying to tell us something.

"Richard Polhill" wrote in message
.. .
GT wrote:
"Richard Polhill" wrote in message
. ..
Joey wrote:
If I get a modern super-compact digital camera such as a mid-range
Canon IXUS (US: Canon Powershot) for general use then ...

... what minimum speed of SD memory should I get to avoid delays?

I see "x133" mentioned a lot on memory adverts. Is x133 fast, slow,
just right for the sort of camera I am thing of?

I would probably get 1GB or 2 GB from this sto
http://www.jacobsdigital.co.uk/index...uery=sd+memory

I don't believe the fact that it's a supercompact is relevant.

The question is whether the camera can use it at all, but if it's recent
there should be no reason why not.

The speed rating of the memory is its maximum speed, so if the camera
can't go that fast, then the memory will run at less than top speed, so
don't worry about compatability due to speed.

Compatability due to size of memory card may be an issue though - see
Richard's last line below

Realistically, you'll probably find no speed difference between a 40x
and 133x card. If you buy based on the size and price rather than speed
you'll typically end up with a fast (say, 133x) card anyway.

Not true. It depends on what the camera is capable of - fast frame
shooting will benefit greatly from faster memory, but I don't know how
many frames per second this camera can do.

Not if the camera cannot write at 133x, and AFAIK most can't.

133x is around 20MB/s write speed.

Surely the limiting factor in the transfer from camera buffer to storage RAM
will be the RAM speed - I would be very disappointed in a new camera if the
buses couldn't handle something faster than 20MB/s. I would expect the
theoretical bus speed to be many times that - maybe even 50 times faster
than that!!

GT wrote:
"Richard Polhill" wrote in message
.. .
GT wrote:
"Richard Polhill" wrote in message
. ..
Joey wrote:
If I get a modern super-compact digital camera such as a mid-range
Canon IXUS (US: Canon Powershot) for general use then ...

... what minimum speed of SD memory should I get to avoid delays?

I see "x133" mentioned a lot on memory adverts. Is x133 fast, slow,
just right for the sort of camera I am thing of?

I would probably get 1GB or 2 GB from this sto
http://www.jacobsdigital.co.uk/index...uery=sd+memory

I don't believe the fact that it's a supercompact is relevant.

The question is whether the camera can use it at all, but if it's recent
there should be no reason why not.
The speed rating of the memory is its maximum speed, so if the camera
can't go that fast, then the memory will run at less than top speed, so
don't worry about compatability due to speed.

Compatability due to size of memory card may be an issue though - see
Richard's last line below

Realistically, you'll probably find no speed difference between a 40x
and 133x card. If you buy based on the size and price rather than speed
you'll typically end up with a fast (say, 133x) card anyway.
Not true. It depends on what the camera is capable of - fast frame
shooting will benefit greatly from faster memory, but I don't know how
many frames per second this camera can do.
Not if the camera cannot write at 133x, and AFAIK most can't.

133x is around 20MB/s write speed.

Surely the limiting factor in the transfer from camera buffer to storage RAM
will be the RAM speed - I would be very disappointed in a new camera if the
buses couldn't handle something faster than 20MB/s. I would expect the
theoretical bus speed to be many times that - maybe even 50 times faster
than that!!



You would expect the bus to be faster than 20MB/s and it probably is. This
just means the bus isn't the bottleneck. You'll be hard pushed to find a
digicam that can write as fast as 10MB/s. Expect around 5MB/s.

You need to consider what the camera can achieve, not what the performance of
an individual component (bus, card, etc.) is. The camera has to interpret the
data from the sensor and convert it to JPEG and write it to the filesystem,
all of which imposes processing overhead. Unless the bus is the bottleneck the
speed of it is irrelevant. Same with the card; if the card is at least 66x
(that is 9.9MB/s) then it isn't going to be the bottleneck.

"Richard Polhill" wrote in message
. ..
GT wrote:
"Richard Polhill" wrote in message
.. .
GT wrote:
"Richard Polhill" wrote in message
. ..
Joey wrote:
If I get a modern super-compact digital camera such as a mid-range
Canon IXUS (US: Canon Powershot) for general use then ...

... what minimum speed of SD memory should I get to avoid delays?

I see "x133" mentioned a lot on memory adverts. Is x133 fast, slow,
just right for the sort of camera I am thing of?

I would probably get 1GB or 2 GB from this sto
http://www.jacobsdigital.co.uk/index...uery=sd+memory

I don't believe the fact that it's a supercompact is relevant.

The question is whether the camera can use it at all, but if it's
recent there should be no reason why not.
The speed rating of the memory is its maximum speed, so if the camera
can't go that fast, then the memory will run at less than top speed, so
don't worry about compatability due to speed.

Compatability due to size of memory card may be an issue though - see
Richard's last line below

Realistically, you'll probably find no speed difference between a 40x
and 133x card. If you buy based on the size and price rather than
speed you'll typically end up with a fast (say, 133x) card anyway.
Not true. It depends on what the camera is capable of - fast frame
shooting will benefit greatly from faster memory, but I don't know how
many frames per second this camera can do.
Not if the camera cannot write at 133x, and AFAIK most can't.

133x is around 20MB/s write speed.

Surely the limiting factor in the transfer from camera buffer to storage
RAM will be the RAM speed - I would be very disappointed in a new camera
if the buses couldn't handle something faster than 20MB/s. I would expect
the theoretical bus speed to be many times that - maybe even 50 times
faster than that!!

You would expect the bus to be faster than 20MB/s and it probably is. This
just means the bus isn't the bottleneck. You'll be hard pushed to find a
digicam that can write as fast as 10MB/s. Expect around 5MB/s.

You need to consider what the camera can achieve, not what the performance
of an individual component (bus, card, etc.) is.

But the camera is made up of these components and the performance of the
camera WILL be as slow as the slowest component. Basically, there is the
image processor, the bus and the flash storage. The image processor can
internally process the image much faster than a flash card can read/write
it. And the bus can handle data transfer at rates many times faster than any
flash card.

The camera has to interpret the data from the sensor and convert it to
JPEG and write it to the filesystem, all of which imposes processing
overhead. Unless the bus is the bottleneck the speed of it is irrelevant.
Same with the card; if the card is at least 66x (that is 9.9MB/s) then it
isn't going to be the bottleneck.

My EOS can take 3 frames per second until the buffer is full. In 8Mpixels,
high JPEG mode, it shoots about 14 shots until it has to sit and wait for
the memory card to catch up - you can watch the access light to see this. In
RAW mode, this delay is more obvious. So the image processor and bus are not
the bottlenecks - the card is!

I 'expect' that a compact digital camera will be slightly slower at
processing images, but it is still a dedicated chip and will process images
much faster than any memory card can transfer them.

I don't think it matters how long the image processor takes to deal with the
photo - it will be significantly less time than it takes the card to store
it away - why else have Sandisk been working on faster and faster cards -
the Extreme IV is with us now. I don't know figures, but it can probably
save 30+MB/s, but will still be the bottleneck !!