Crave Talk: 32GB SDHC to kill CompactFlash?
Tags: panasonic, disc, shots, compactflash
Memories are made of... what? Memory needs to be reliable yet invisible, and it's never glamorous. Seagate got it right when naming a 60GB drive 'DAVE'. Today we're interested in memory on the move: cards for cameras, camcorders and MP3 players. We first saw Panasonic's RP-SDV32GU1K -- also known as the 32GB SDHC card -- at CES this year. It will be available in April 2008, and we're hoping it will be a nail in the coffin of proprietary formats, while CompactFlash's days could be numbered.
Performance-wise, the 32GB Panasonic is a Class 6 speed card, meaning that it will transfer data at a sustained rate of at least 6MB per second. In a classic piece of PR-speak, Panasonic also claims the card will be "equipped with a new user-friendly labelling feature", which means they've bunged a sticker on the front and you can write on it -- presumably magnifying glass and tiny pen are sold separately.
With a suggested retail price of $699 (about £350 -- gasp!) the 32GB card seems like too much of a good thing for photographers, even those shooting raw and JPEGs simultaneously while bracketing all their shots on full resolution. Even with that kind of belt-and-braces, snapping on an 8- or 10-megapixel dSLR you can still get more than 100 shots on a 4GB card, available now for less than £20.
Where the 32GB card may come into its own is in video. Panasonic claims it will store up to 12 hours of 1,440x1,080i high-definition video, and four hours of 1080p 'Full HD'. That isn't as much as you get on a hard drive-based camcorder, such as the 100GB Toshiba Gigashot A100 or the forthcoming 120GB Sony HDR-SR12, but it beats disc and tape-based shooters. With memory card slots turning up in more and more devices, the convenience of being able to introduce a newly filled disc to your TV and start watching straightaway will be possible with card as well as disc.
CompactFlash cards can reach 32 and even 64GB, although generally at the expense of transfer speed. Most dSLRs use CompactFlash, but they're physically bigger than SD cards and more expensive. Realising the creeping ubiquity of the SD format, Pentax's new K20D and Samsung's new GX20 support SD and SDHC. Meanwhile, Panasonic is bundling a 16GB Pro High Speed SD Card with new purchases of the DMC-L10, and don't get us started on microSD or Eye-Fi.
CompactFlash is reinventing itself with a new CS format, but as this won't be compatible with existing CF devices, we think it's too little too late. For us, CompactFlash is on the way out: maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon. Of course, that's not a problem for anyone whose existing CF cards won't suddenly stop working. With the xD format also on the ropes -- Fujifilm has added SD support alongside xD in newer cameras -- hopefully Sony's proprietary MemoryStick will be next against the wall. -Rich Trenholm
- Share this article:
RELATED LINKS
Bluetrek Bizz: The spork of Bluetooth headsets
Canon M30: Storage with a screen
Toshiba EasyGuard and EasyMedia: Big and clever hard drives
AnonymousFri 29 February, 2008 6:41pm
Photographers will not trust their entire days shoot to one card. Everyone I know and work with are pretty much using 1 and 2 GB cards for a good reason. If a card fails or is stolen you lose only part of your work. A 32GB card would hold well in excess of 1000 shots on recent camera, and that is a lot to lose.
Once you all upgrade to these things, I have a plentiful list of people to buy your 1,2 and 4GB cards.
DavidRGilsonSun 2 March, 2008 6:57pm
I object to the implied mundanity of being called "Dave". Thank you.
Rich TrenholmMon 3 March, 2008 10:33am
HAL says: "Look Dave, I can see you're really upset about this. I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over." No mundanity implied, more reliability, solidity and trustworthiness!
Anonymous, Interesting point on the redundancy aspect of memory cards - another reason why camcorder users may get more benefit from larger capacity cards than photographers.
Ask questions, share opinions and find answers in the CNET.co.uk forums
7.3
8.5
7.7
AnonymousFri 29 February, 2008 5:56pm
It's a shame that SD has become the de facto standard. In my opinion it's a poorly engineered format. They took the MMC format, crammed in extra connections and a write protect switch, leaving physical weakeness in both areas.
I sincerely hope compact flash is here to stay. For professional uses (I'm a wedding photographer) CF is far more suitable than SD. SD is too small and too flimsy; too easily dropped and too easily damaged. The CF format is more robust and much easier to handle in a rush. I don't mind smaller media in compact cameras, but I never want to see SD in a DSLR that I use.
SATA CF will be good for transfer rates. I just hope that they work out a good scheme for backwards compatibility.
As for saying that people's cards won't suddenly stop working, well that's true, but they do have a limited lifespan, and some people keep cards for less time than their camera bodies.