Fuji 9500 "CF" card

Discussion in 'Fuji' started by jem, Dec 2, 2005.

  1. jem

    jem Guest

    Just got a new camera and it was my understanding it used the compact flash
    cards. I assumed that is what they meant by the identification as "cf"
    card. I that not correct ?

    jem, Dec 2, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. jem

    Sel Guest

    Hi Jem

    Yep thats correct. It also uses XD cards which are faster. Most
    noticable when reviewing in camera. The XD is my card of choice.

    Sel ........ :)


    Sel, Dec 2, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. I have one, (called the S9000 on this side of the Atlantic), and I
    got tow 512 MB CF cards labelled 80X which I was told is faster
    than the xD cards. Was that wrong?
    Fred Williams, Dec 2, 2005
  4. jem

    ASAAR Guest

    An 80x card should be faster than xD cards. (My 1GB xD card is
    probably comparable in speed to a 35x CF card). But I have heard,
    whether true or not, that in some camera, possibly the S9000/9500,
    that if the fastest cards of both types are available the maximum
    operating speed is attained with xD cards. When comparing the
    review speeds of two cards, the file sizes on each (determined by
    resolution & compression) should be the same to get meaningful
    results. The number of files shouldn't be too different either, as
    the review speed of a card with thousands of images may be slower
    than another card having only hundreds of image files on it.
    ASAAR, Dec 2, 2005
  5. jem

    Sel Guest

    Yes. Check this link.

    I have a 1gb cf and a 512 xd in the camera. There is a marked difference
    in speed. Exactly the same as my s7000 was. Don't notice so muich when
    taking pics, but do when reviewing.
    Sel, Dec 2, 2005
  6. jem

    RobG Guest

    I've put a Sandisk UltraII CF card in my S9500 - the write speed is no
    faster than the (standard speed) Olympus xD, despite the claimed write
    speed improvement. This, I would say, is due to camera limitations. Bit of
    a shame really, as I wanted to shoot RAW quickly, but never mind. It works,
    and it'll stand me in good stread when I splurge bigtime and buy a dSLR...
    maybe (c: The read speed is significantly quicker though.

    RobG, Dec 2, 2005
  7. Thanks people. I may have been victimized by a case of the
    proprietor telling me that the stuff he has in stock is better
    than the stuff he'd have to order. No matter. I'm not going to
    get an impressive burst mode rate out of the S9000/S9500 anyway.
    Whether I wait 2.5 second or 4.5 seconds for a shot to be saved is
    usually not a matter of great concern.
    Here in southern Quebec, tonight there has been a snow storm that
    looks peaceful enough, but it has made the roads very hazardous.
    I was caught out in the storm and took the opportunity to shoot a
    traffic accident and the police and emergency vehicles. Steadying
    the camera was an issue. I didn't have my tripod. The speed of
    the storage wasn't. ... Apparently the place where I chose to
    park was, for the police. I moved when asked to and there was no
    problem. I just failed to put that crisp focus on the shots I
    got, although if the full frame is printed even 8 x 10, it's
    probably not noticible. Only if cropped and blown up is it a
    problem. Quite a storm though... cars off the road everywhere.
    Fred Williams, Dec 3, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.