Memory-Card Reviews

You can't go wrong with SanDisk cards! I use my memory cards under heavy heavy usage for digital imagery and audio. My cards get beaten on as they get pulled out of and pushed into many different devices. Oftentimes, I don't bother to turn off power. I've never had a single SanDisk card go bad ever! I now buy them exclusively.

This media has been perfectly reliable in capture and download through a Olympus C3040. With comparos between the Sony Memory disk and compact flash card twice the thickness, there's very little difference in r/w that I can notice. Using the 5-shot digital 'auto-winder' on the Olympus the card sucks the data down no problem. Even with repeated semi-auto firing, the memory card performs decently. It does lag at 2048x1536 (medium quality) and it will do more so at higher levels - but it's no worse than other formats. USB download through OEM cables is rapid quick compared to the slower compact flash on Kodak DC265 for some reason.

The size is unbeatable. The wear and long term use is something to keep an eye on with the contacts exposed compared to the other formats. At this price, I have no complaints buying a bunch and shooting without capacity worries.

What more can I say except that they work flawlessly with my Fuji 2600 camera ?

The card has never given me any problem for last 2 months. I have used it to its full capacity couple of times. And its worth its price since the 64MB also costs a similar price.

Sandisk has a 5 year warranty on the card, which I think should be sufficient given the way the memory cards have been increasing in their capacity and the increase in MP's of digicams.

If are using a Sandisk rebate offer, they do have a rebate phone line to call & inquire about your status. I haven't got mine back yet but beleive that I will. ... So you can count on the rebate offer to lower your price....

Also there have been some concerns with using a 128MB card in place of 32 or 64 makes your camera slower ? Well as far I have observed, the camera is sligthly slower when starting the review for pictures on the camera. Other than this (expected) slowness, there's none to it. The smartmedia cards of all sizes have same speeds, unlike compact flash cards.

Update : I got the rebate back from Sandisk, so you can count on it !

I recently received a Fuji Finepix F601 as a gift; the giver, a professional photographer, included a Fuji 128MB Smart Media Card as a matter of course. Thank goodness he knew what he was doing in terms of storage needs, at least -- the 601 only comes with a 16MB card, which on the 601 is only enough for 5 images at the highest recording level. If you're getting a compatible Fuji, Olympus, or other-brand camera, you really need the highest storage card possible.

But it turns out these cards are fragile, and fingerprints can short them out or cause problems with the camera or reader being able to access their contents. So the best way to keep them around forever is to get a 128 MB card and never remove it! Ideally, then, this should be a solution coupled with the purchase or ownership of a camera which interfaces directly (USB or firewire) with the PC, so there won't be a need to remove the card. Ever. That security, and the ability to store over a hundred 8x10 print-quality pix on one wafer-thin card, makes the bigger sized card easily worth the extra cost if you're getting a Fuji or other-brand digital camera.

As for brand...well, after trying a Fuji and a Viking card, and checking the wiring stats on both, it turns out the brand names of Smart Cards have almost nothing to do with quality (with the exception of one minor function on Olympus cameras which only Olympus cards do). These are, for all intents and purposes, interchangable -- so buying the cheapest one out there is the best bet. And, although amazon.com inexplicably doesn't include rebate savings when listing card costs unless you're looking at the actual page for the actual product, with rebates, the Viking card IS the cheapest Smart Media brand on the market -- by a factor of about 10% or more. With no complaints and lots of joyful picture taking happening in my house, I therefore give SimpleTech five stars for the basic product...but take away one star for a higher cost. Sorry, SimpleTech.

If you're using it for a digital camera, PDA, or an mp3 player you can expect speed and quality from the SimpleTech 128 MB Smart Media Card. First of all, it adds a lot of extra memory at an inexpensive price. With a 2.1 megapixal digital camera, you can take 160 full-quality pictures instead of 40 or 80 that you would get with a 32 or 64 MB Smart Media Card. It also stores pictures faster than many other brands, allowing you to take pictures quicker. If you own any device using Smart Media memory that is compatible with 128 MB, you shouldn't settle for less.

I'm using this smartmedia with my Samsung Digimax 200. Although I relate this phenomenon to the smartmedia format per-se, it does make your camera slower. After using this card it took nearly 26 seconds for the camera to be ready to take a shot. That includes initialization and flash charge. This is way much longer than with the original 8MB card. So it's not that this particular brand is bad, but the higher capacity the card has, more you'll have to wait to initialize your camera.
Besides that, this was a great purchase, along with a simpletech smartmedia USB 2.0 reader.

I poped into my Axim and downloaded 25 songs (approx 5 MB/song) and it worked like a champ. No problem so far. But instead of 128 MB it showed the total capacity as 122.10 MB. I sent an email to sandisk customer service and I got the following answer from them. This might be helpful for you.

The operating system, when reading the size of the card, reports a slightly different capacity than what is listed on the card's label
Definitions of a Megabyte:
1) Operating Systems commonly define a Megabyte (MB) as: 2 to the 20th power (1,024KB--Kilobytes).
2) DiskDrive and Flash Memory Card Manufacturers commonly define a MB as one million bytes (exactly 1,000,000 bytes).

Unformatted (Capacity)
Also known as drive byte capacity before formatting. The Maximum capacity of disk drive before formatting equals
[ (# Cylinders) X (# Heads) X (# Sectors) X (# Bytes per Track) ]

Example:
64MB CompactFlash Card consists of:
490 Cylinders
8 Heads
32 Sectors
512 Bytes per Track

This equates to: [ (490) X (8) X (32) X (512) ] = 64,225,280

Unformatted Capacity: 64,225,280 bytes
Formatted Capacity: 63,934,464 bytes (User Data)

Cause:
Disk Drive Companies such as SanDisk define 1 MEGABYTE as 1,000,000
BYTES. Operating Systems define 1 MEGABYTE as 1,048,576 BYTES (1024K X 1024K or 2 to the 20th power).

Example:
SanDisk 64MB CompactFlash Card being read by Microsoft Operating
System.
SanDisk Total Formatted Capacity divided by 1 MB (as defined by the Operating System) equates to the following:
63,934,464 BYTES / 1,048,576 BYTES = 60,972,656 BYTES, 60.9MB displayed by OS.

I was looking for the cheapest digital camera I could find that would take adequate shots of small collectibles for listing on eBay. I bought the Argus 3200 at a great price, knowing it had almost no internal memory. A second problem was that my older system has no USB port. My solution was to buy the SanDisk 128 MB flash card, and a card reader that plugs into the printer port--both from Amazon. Both have worked fine for me so far. At this time, a 32 MB card would be adequate for my purposes, but I don't regret buying the extra capacity--and the 128 costs little more than a 64. The SanDisk card arrived in three days-- with no shipping charge--and the price was much better than off the rack in my own city.

I bought this card about 18 months ago, and I've taken several thousand pictures with it. It's been taken overseas to experience a humid Scandinavian summer, and it's been used extensively the furnace that some people refer to as southern Arizona. I have several other Sandisk CF cards, and this being one of my oldest ones, I've got "nothing" but good things to say about it (except for the speed). :-)

Pros:
* Durable and extremely reliable - Sandisk is without a doubt the most reliable brand on the market for CF cards.
* Can be found very reasonably priced - usually very good value for money.

Cons:
* Just about the slowest CF card on the market.

Personally, I'm all about reliability. I wouldn't trade my Sandisk cards for any other card, even if the price was lower or performance higher. A card that corrupts your pictures even on rare occations is a useless card in my mind. This or any other of my Sandisk CF cards have never given me any problems. I also have several friends that have used Sandisk CF cards for several years, and between us we've never had any problems with any of our Sandisk CF cards.

I would highly recommend this card, and despite its speed, I would say it's a good buy. Because of its outstanding reliability, I give it 5 stars!!!

I've used Viking components in the past and never had any negative experiences with their products. When I got a digital camera, I shopped the local computer and mall stores for Compact Flash memory cards before turning to Amazon.com. I was pleasantly surprised to find an affordable Compact Flash card in the capacity I was looking for made by Viking. The card works great with my Kodak digital camera and Sandisk CF reader. A top notch product at an affordable price.

Well, I had no idea how much room a 1 MP picture would take up on a CF card. I know it is a combination of compression and format, but I never really did the math.

GREAT PRICE: I bought this card, number one, because the price was great. Now the price is even greater when you get it for about 2MB for $1.

NUMBER OF PICTURES THAT CAN BE STORED:
155 in a DC240 with 1MP.
55 in a DX3900 with 3.1 MP.
I never knew the MP versus MB formula, this practical application helped me out. I understand however, much depends on your compression and format. This was all .jpg files and on Kodak cameras.

SEEMS COMPATIBLE FOR PDA AND PC:
I know one of the concerns on these cards is compatibility. Since I have had it, I have put it in an @migo Pocket PC, on the PCMCIA card on an IBM laptop and a Kodak DX3600 and a HP315. It worked great.

Nice card and a nice size, I'm set for awhile now.

I ordered this but something happened and I got a 128 mb chip instead. Either way its great been using it for a few years now and I've had no problems.

.
.
This device works MUCH faster than connecting your camera directly to the laptop. For that reason alone its worth the price, but there's more...

I use this to allow me to take unlimited pictures when I'm on a trip. Fill up my CF card, copy all the images to the laptop, delete all the images from the CF card and start taking pictures again. When the card is full, I repeat the process - unlimited pictures! Why buy a larger capacity CF card when you can get this adapter for much less?

Another thing: Images from a camera are just computer files. I've used this adapter to turn my 32 MB compact flash card into a "disk drive". Once you put this CF card and adapter into the laptop's card slot, it shows up just like any other "disk drive".

So you can put the CF card/adapter in your home or offece desktop computer's card reader, use Windows Explorer to copy files (Word documents, spreadsheets, image files, or whatever) to the card, take the CF card out and move it over to the laptop - using this adapter. It makes the compact flash card act just like a high capacity disk drive! You can bring files home from work the same way, and the CF card fits in your wallet...
.
.

I plugged this adapter into my new Dell Laptop and it brought up my CompactFlash card as an additional hard drive in Windows 2000, no software or additional drivers required.

I was then able to browse and even edit pictures on the card as if it were a disk drive. Truly amazing. All peripherals should be this easy to install and intuitive to use.

I use this product to move pictures from my camera to my computer. My primary purpose was to save my battery since it requires my camera to be on when downloading shots and I have a 256MB Compact Flash card.

Not only does it save my battery power by allowing me to put the CF card into my computer, but it downloads very quickly. I have had no problems with the unit and received the adapter from Viking earlier than I expected.

I was hoping to increase the write speed on my Minolta 7i which makes me wait for a full write before I can take the next photo. In this camera, the Ultra II is actually slower than a "regular" SanDisk 256MB card. Ran a couple of quick tests, using the Ultra II, a "regular speed" SanDisk CF and a 1G IBM CF Micro Drive:
--------------------------------------------
In the 7i, taking a macro photo of a catalog page with lots of colors, small images and text (5 MP):

UltraII - 13 seconds RAW : 15 seconds TIF : 4.5 seconds full size JPG.

Regular - 11 seconds RAW: 14 seconds TIF : 3.8 seconds JPG

1G IBM MD - 12 Seconds RAW : 18 seconds TIF : 4.0 seconds JPG
_______________________________
Performance in my Nikon D-100 was better when taking the same (6.1MP) landscape photo:

Ultra II - 5.1 seconds RAW : 25 seconds TIF : 3.2 seconds full size JPG

Regular - 5.4 seconds RAW : 26 seconds TIF : 3.7 seconds JPG

1G IBM MD - 11 seconds RAW : 29.3 seconds TIF : 4.2 seconds JPG
*******************************************

When I purchased this card, Amazon was having a GREAT sale on it, I paid a dollar more than what a "standard" speed card would cost, so I am not irritated. If I had paid the normal retail price though, I'd be upset with its less than stellar performance in the intended application.

So, make sure that your camera can take advantage of the increased write speed of this card before you spend the extra money on it over a "standard" speed card. I'll be using it as backup on the Nikon rather than as a primary on the Minolta.

At first I was a bit hesitant to get Sandisk products because I've heard so many people complaining. But after doing thorough research, I found that the rest of the brands were being equally lambasted by users. So, I decided to choose based on technicals and not opinions. Well, this CompactFlash card is quite powerful and what was the bearing point for me to lean and buy this is its price. I've used it to record digital video clips, I've taken pictures of all sizes and with different visual effects, I've done high-speed shutter (~2.2 shots/sec @ 1024x768) and it works phenomenally and flawlessly. I have not had ANY of the errors people write so much about and I'm actually sure enough that I'm willing to recommend it to others.
The 256MB its sufficient for about 200 3.1-Megapixel high-quality pictures. Which can hold a weekend's vacation worth of pictures without having to erase or transfer them to your computer. However, if you can afford the extra $50, I suggest buying the 512Mb one. In short: good value, excellent performance, good price and good quality.

I purchased this product to use in a Sandisk Firewire CF card reader in order to transfer data files between the home and the office. I normally use 100MB Zip disks, but the transfer rate using a USB Zip250 for a 30 MB file is 3 min. 19 sec. which is incredibly slow. I had a Sandisk 128 MB CF card, but using the Firewire CF card reader, a 30 MB file still took 1 min. 9 sec. to transfer so I bought the Sandisk Ultra II 256 MB card since it was supposed to have a higher transfer rate. It did. It allowed the transfer of the 30 MB file in 15 seconds which is 4.6 times faster than the non-ultra Sandisk CF card and 13 times faster than a 100MB Zip disk in a USB Zip250 drive. I was pleasantly surprised. I would buy another one to use in my digital camera since I am pretty sure it will function faster than the non-ultra Sandisk CF card I use now. Plus, the Ultra II card was no more expensive than the non-ultra card and the Sandisk Ultra II CF card was comparably or better priced compared to CF cards from other manufacturers.

Having good storage capacity for your digital camera is a must.
My Sony DSC-P72 came with a lousy 16 MB memory stick, so I was practically pushed to by this additional stick.
The product itself works perfectly well. Access time is very fast. Note however that some 5MB out of the 128MB in this stick are used for internal file system structure. This leaves you with "only" 123MB of user memory.
Unfortunatelly, the price is not good at all. Sony prices this sort of supplies very high. There are compatible products out there in the market that cost 30% less.
I would have given it 5 stars if it hadn't been for the price.

I was first peeved about having to be stuck with a predetermined Sony memory stick format. But after continued use in TRV900, TRV11 video cams and the Sony Clie PDA- I have to say I'm very happy with the memory stick's flexibility. I usually hate being stuck in a specific company format, but at least Sony did it right.

The transfer rate in the Clie is very rapid. Backing up the entire contents of the Clie takes literally a few seconds. The Clie has a program that allows you RUN programs off of the memory stick. This is not the fastest operating speed, but it is no worse than a Zip drive disk.

The size and reliability is unbeatable. Compared to a San memory card that has lost it's life after 1 year, the Sony memory sticks have performed flawlessly for pics, data, and application runs. Go for the 32+ MB and up - just like a hard drive, you think a realistic amount is adequate. But once you start shooting and using, you'll wish you upgraded for the bigger stick.

WHEN I BOUGHT MY CAMERA I HAD A OFF BRAND MEMORY STICK GIVEN TO ME. AND ALSO BOUGHT ANOHTER SONY MEMORY STICK. WHAT A DIIFERENCE BETWEEN THE SONY BRAND AND THE OTHER. SONY'S MEMORY STICK IS CLEAR AS A BELL. NO FUSSYNESS.CAN BLOW THE PICTURE UP AND STILL HAVE CLEARITY. YOU WON'T BE DISAPPOINTED IN THIS MEMORY STICK. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.

I recently purchased 3 of these cards for my Sony digital camera (DSC P30), and they work great. Access speed seems to be even faster than the Sony cards. I rarely purchase multiple quantities of something without first trying one, but I was in a hurry this time so took a chance. I came out fine.

Comes with:
-1 small soft plastic (or vinyl?) disk storage case
-3 disk labels
-Instructions in multiple languages

Specifications (included with packaging):
-Memory type: flash
-Operating voltage: 2.7v to 3.6 v
-Power Consumption: Average-approx 45 mA, Standby-approx 130 uA
-Access speed: Write-Max 1.5 MBytes/sec, Read-Max 2.45 MBytes/sec

Per packaging, this product is not compatible with:
-MagicGate
-Sony models: DSR-PD100, DSR-PD100A, DCR-TRV900, DCR-TRV10, DCR-PC3, DCR-PC100, MSAC-PC1

Score: I gave it a 4 instead of a 5 because of the price. Although the price is good from a comparative standpoint, I still think memory cards are overpriced. Digital media is more convenient than film, but also considerably more expensive. If you're new to digital photography and money is a concern, definitely think twice.

Bottom Line: I consider this a great product and a reasonable value.

I bought this product for use in my Sony Clie handheld computer. I was looking for a cheaper alternative to the Sony brand memory stick, and I am glad to say that this product has worked flawlessly over the past year.

I would buy a Sandisk product again.

I've got three of these and they work just as well as Sony's. I take pictures with my Sony on them but I use them instead of floppy disks. I put it in my reader at work, home, and at my mother's, and download programs from the internet directly to them, transfers files to them and use them the same way as floppys are use. I haven't used the floppy on any of the computers for the past year. Small as a stick of gum, can be packed in a wallet. Best item invented!

The only difference between the Olympus and other brands of SmartMedia cards is that only the Olympus SmartMedia card supports the Panorama function of the camera (see owners manual for details, but basically it allows you to stitch up to 10 images together into a panoramic image). If you never use this feature just buy the less expensive memory. If you have a need for panoramas, and already have one Olympus card, use that Olympus card for panoramas, and buy the less expensive SmartMedia cards for all your other photo needs. As an example, on Amazon, the Viking 128MB card is ... cheaper than the Olympus.

If you are going to get a memory card, why get less than the most available, especially now that you can get 128MB for about [money amount] Soon more memory is sure to become available, but at this point I believe 128MB is the most you can find in "Smart Media Card" from Olympus, or even a generic card for that matter. This will give you almost one picture per MB, meaning that with the 128MB Smart Media Card you get well over a hundred High Quality (HQ) pictures. HQ gives you a very nice 5x7" photo at 300dpi. You can significantly reduce the about of memory used by the card if you decrease the size of each picture taken. For small pictures used to attach to emails you could conceivably get well over a 1000 pictures on the card by going from just over 3.9 mega pixels (HQ) down to just over 0.3 mega pixels (Normal mode on the camera) similar to the resolution of the first VGA monitors, reducing the memory usage by more than 1/10th. As far as buying the Olympus Card, I would recommend it, particularly if you are considering using the "panoramic" feature that "stitches" multiple scenes together to make a panorama using the software that comes with the Olympus digital camera. I understand that this feature is only available on the Olympus Smart Media Cards and now you can find Olympus cards at a comparable price to the "generic" brands. I have had no problems using the Smart Media Card from Olympus. I would recommend it highly. The only con that I can see won't come until they come out with a card with more memory.

Tangent to the 128MB Olympus Smart Media Card is their Card Reader. I opted out of that option, because the only benefit of it seemed to be the convenience of not having to plug your camera into a USB port. This in my mind is off-set by the inconvenience and exposure to damage of removing the card itself to put it into the reader, sounds like an excuse to sell "every available gadget" to me. So why not download directly from the camera? The only other argument in favor of the card reader is that it saves camera batteries, and although I'm getting slightly off subject here, it goes almost without saying that if you are using NiMH 1700 - 2000 mAh rechargeable batteries, which I think you will find is the best bet in the long run, leaving your camera on a few more seconds is immaterial.

Since Amazon sells the 128 Olympus Smartmedia Card at such a good price. I think it is well worth the extra ten dollars to have all the features of the camera work, rather than use a generic card. The 128Card has such a good capacity that it might be the only one you will ever need for normal shots. For fine shots it is essential!

WOW, THIS CARD IS AWESOME. The specification of my computer was 1000 MHZ, 512MB RAM, and geforce 2 MX400. When Warcraft 3 beta was out, the highest resolution I could set to was 800 x 640 with all the details set to low, and the gameplay still lagged ALOT. My friend has a processor identical to mine(1000MHZ), only has 128 MB ram but he used a ATI geforce 2 and it seemed to outperform my system. The highest resolution he could play on his computer was 1028 and also with the details set to low.

After I upgraded my Geforce 2 to Visiontek's Geforce 4 Ti 4600, all I can say is, WOW!!! When I first installed the card and played Warcraft 3 in 800 x 600 mode, it was not as smooth as I expected, but my only thought at that time was, what the heck, lets give this card a try. I turned the resolution of the game to 1028 and with all the details set to high. Guess what happened, the gameplay WAS SOOOOO SMOOTH. So I pushed the resolution to the next stage, 1280, and the gameplay just got even BETTER. Then I pushed the resolution to the highest, which is 1600, AND THE GAMEPLAY WAS CRAZY, ALL DETAILS IN THE GAME FROM A UNIT TO A BUILDING TO THE ENVIRONMENT WERE SO BEAUTIFUL, NO LAGS AT ALL.

My 1000 MHZ, 512 MB ram, and GEforce 4 Ti4600 outperformed another friend of mine with 2000 MHZ, 1 Gig ram, Geforce 2, when it comes to games.

Each stage in Warcraft 3 was hard to achieve, it may seem easy because from 1028 to 1280 you may think there is not alot of difference. When I went back to the friend with 1000 MHZ and 128 MB ram with an ATI geforce2, his gameplay was smooth under 1028 mode, but when I pushed it a stage beyond, which was 1280, THE CURSOR DIDN'T EVEN MOVE AND THE UNITS RESPONDED TO ME AFTER A LONG LONG TIME. I was convinced that a slight change from 1028 to 1280 could challenge you computer to its limit, not to say that I not even changed to resolution to 1600 but also with all the details set to high. WOW THIS CARD IS REALLY AWESOME.

I can also play RED FACTION in the highest resolution, no lag, not at all, the higher the resolution you set, the faster you can expect the graphics, and the more power you can expect from your GEFORCE 4 TI 4600.

THIS CARD IS WEIRD, YOU JUST NEVER KNOW WHERE ITS POWER STARTS TO DECLINE. MAYBE I CAN SET THE RESOLUTION HIGHER THAN 1600, WHICH I CANT BECAUSE MY MONITOR ONLY SUPPORTS TO 1600, GIVE IT A TRY GUYS, AND TELL ME IF ITS POWER WILL DECLINE WHEN IT REACHES BEYOND 1600.

Visiontek makes some of the greatest video cards in the computer world and the Geforce 4 ti 4600 is the fastest and most powerful video card on the market today.

However, because of it's steep price i only suggest this to hardcore computer gamers who have to have the fastest computer on the block. i strongly suggest to other buyers buy the Geforce 4 ti 4400 which is slightly slower but cheaper.

also, Beware of the fact that this video card is very long and WILL NOT FIT ON SOME MOTHERBOARDS. you should make sure that the card will fit by making sure that there is nothing behind you PCI slots (cables, DIM slots, ect...) that could prevent the card from going into the PCI slot.

I got this card the day after it came out(one day shipping from Amazon). All I can say is...wow. I just upgraded from a Gateway 400mhz P2 processor with a Voodoo Banshee card, to my custom PC. I run this card with a P4 2.0 processor, 1GB of memory and this video card which was the final component. It runs games that made my old PC crash. Every game I have thrown at it runs perfectly. The graphics are better than any I have ever seen, it actually looks like those pictures on the game boxes! I never thought Half-Life could look so good.

Basically, if you have the dough to shell out, and you do alot of gaming and or video editing, there is no substitute. Not to mention they don't even make games yet that utilize it's full potential, so it will not be out of date for some time!