That's Brentford, Middlesex, not Brentwood, Essex.

Confused me for a minute there

Dan

...not necessarily the card that was poorly made.

Dan

Incidentally, your mention of speed made me think. How many shots do you get on the D before the buffer's full? The literature claims six, but I think mine always stops after 5. I use PQI 512Mb 60x CFs, although I've got a no-name 1Gb on the way from 7dayshop.

Dan

It would be interesting to know how many RAW files you'll get on the SD card in the D, at least that way we can see if how many files you can fit on a card is all down to the camera, or at least partly due to the card.

Dan

It made me think there was something wrong with it. The only thing I really prefer on the newer models is the 4-way rocker switch on the back - but then they go and spoil it by putting the AF point selection options in a menu!

Oh, and the LCD's better.

And that grip of course...

Dan

Hi Matt,

Seems like quite a big difference for a smaller jpeg - I'm guessing the DS PEFs are around 10.5Mb? My D ones are usually about 13Mb.

I recently tried the DL2(?) to see what the 50-200 was like, and the grip did seem better than the D, although no vertical grip option is a big no-no for me. The lens seemed to be quite slow in focusing, compared to any of my lenses on the D - just seemed sluggish, not so much hunting as taking its time to get anywhere. Is this normal on the DL, or a dodgy lens, or just the way the lens is geared?

Dan

Thanks Andy, amazing what can be done - a 25% reduction in file size seems huge. I wonder if it is truly lossless, or just not too noticable. Just about impossible to try out, but if you could compare identically composed images from the D and DS, would there be a slight reduction in quality due to the compression? (D owners nod knowingly )

But then, better in-camera processing probably more than makes up for that if there is. (D owners look a little less smug )

Dan

Don,

The jpegs will vary in size, my D estimates 122 available shots on a 512Mb CF card when formatted, but can easily accommodate 200 if the conditions are right. Likewise, the RAW image filesize will vary because, as far as I'm aware, there's an embedded jpeg within the file, which is used for previews in some software I guess. Hence this jpeg will vary in file size, and therefore the RAW will too.

What I have noticed from these posts is that the D saving to CF gets around 36 RAW files per 512Mb, whereas the DS/DL saving to SD get around 45+. Any ideas why?

Dan

Hi Brian,

No, I wasn't after it, but I did have a look. I've got a non-descript one that I've glued a suitable eyepiece adaptor to, but since digital, I've not used it much (if at all, come to think of it). Not that I used it a huge amount when I was using film.

I tend to use a combination of Dons method and getting down low to peer as well as I can through the viewfinder - I just make sure I wear a pair of trousers that don't show the dirt.

Cheers,
Dan

And your search is over? Not a bad price I'd say

Have fun scrabbling about on your knees!
Dan