Lexar's UDMA High Speed CF Cards For Theoretical Cameras

Illustration for article titled Lexars UDMA High Speed CF Cards For Theoretical Cameras

Playing catchup to the high speed SDHC flash format, Lexar's releasing a professional UDMA version of the ComactFlash format designed for high speed writing for photogs. This allows quick, successive snaps to be saved, which in turn lets you pick out the exact frame that Britney's PR people's smiles turned into shock-horror when they realized she was shaving her head.

Advertisement

Unfortunately, the cameras that support these UDMA cards won't be announced until "later this year".

Advertisement

Lexar unleashes high speed CF card for yet-unannounced DSLRs [Pocket Lint]

Share This Story

Get our newsletter

DISCUSSION

Sorry in advance for this rant, but:

This "x" speed rating thing has gone too far.

It made sense on a CD - x times faster than standard playing of a music CD. They adapted that well to DVD's, and it made sense.

But what on earth are they doing with "133x", "150x", and "300x" ratings on various flash media? Sure, I can tell easily that 300 is bigger than 150...but what about comparing Compact Flash to SD? Are the base scales (1x) the same among all flash varieties? What about comparing CD/DVD to flash? (not that I care...but it seems like they're drawing a parallel by using a similar rating).

And flash media comes in many many different sizes (ranging from a few megabytes to a few gigabytes)...so the x-rating loses all meaning if you're interested in how long it takes to fill up or dump the card (like you'd be interested in with a CD/DVD). I think with flash media, they need to stick with "capacity" and "MB/s" ratings, and do away with the "x" business.

Capacity and MB/s ratings would be much clearer for anybody who actually cares — IE: if I know I'm taking 10MB pictures, and I want to be able to take 4 per second, I know what minimum write speed I need. When packaging lists only an "x" rating, and neglects to list actual transfer speed numbers, then a consumer has to hunt around for the conversion.

"300x" looks like a nice friendly number, but it's got less meaning on its own than an actual transfer speed number.