Don't expect the impossible, only what the specs state
Written: Mar 03 '03
|
Product Rating:
|
|
|
Pros: Massive size & low price
Cons: writes slower than memory cards
The Bottom Line: Storage galore, cheap compared to greedy memory manufacturers' products, performs as expected-best overall value for the $
|
|
|
| mormonics's Full Review: IBM MicroDrive |
I have read a number of reviews covering the various flavors of microdrives and felt I needed to add my own, but in a positive light. I only own 1 digital camera, a Canon Powershot S40, but have 3 of the 1gb CF sized drives. The #1 reason why I finally purchased a digital camera was entirely based on the availability and introduction of the IBM Microdrive. My largest gripe with digital cameras has been, and always will be, the storage factor. I normally shoot all my pictures in RAW mode, full resolution, which means a few megabytes per picture. Nothing out there justified even the thought of a digital camera because of the costs. I could have purchased a 128 MB CF card for $100+, or a 512MB for way more. I refused to fall into the camera maker-CF card maker monopoly. Had I purchased a 128 MB CF card, I could have taken the standard 36 shots. What's the point? I needed capacity, but was in a state of shock when I saw all the prices out there for memory cards. Enter the IBM Microdrive.
Pros. 1gb storage. What more is there to say? That will hold quite a few of the shots I take. With my 2 other drives along, I have enough storage for a normal vacation. The price can't be beat. I purchased my last one for $200, which is considerably less than if I had purchased a regular 1gb CF card. Do a simple search on Yahoo Shopping for these-tons of them out there for around, or just under, $200.
Cons. The only real "con" I have with the microdrive is the access time. Obviously, pure memory will have much faster access times, while the microdrive will have more of a "lag" in comparison when writing. The only downside to this would be if someone requires 1/10th of a second between shots. I don't need to take 3 or 4 frames a second. This would be a big factor for someone who does though. The only other con I have is more of a complaint against other cons written about the microdrive. I have seen many people write about "killing the battery" or whatever. Batteries have not progressed at the same speed as the rest of technology. Sure, batteries are better than they used to be, but they still are pretty weak. I have not run across a camera yet that can simply use 1 battery per day, regardless of the image capturing media used. To say that the microdrive drains the battery is a bit overzealous. Anytime photos are written, the battery is used. If you use the LCD, more of the battery is used. Zoom in and out, change settings onscreen, etc.-all drain the battery. My simple solution is to have a couple of extra batteries(fully charged) on hand. I do not use the LCD at all, but I still can't last a day continuously taking photos.
In summary, I would have to say the IBM microdrives are the best storage mediums for digital cameras. They may not be suited for everyone, but I would guess that they would be suited for most. Check with your camera manufacturer to see if it is compatible-not every CF II device will work with it.
Recommended:
Yes
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
mormonics
|
|
Reviews written: 3
Trusted by: 0 members
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.