Card Reader Question

[PoohJen]

Ok, admittedly, transferring pics from my XT is soooo slow!

There's a SanDisk compact flash reader at the store for about $20; that was the only one they had (I don't really need a 12-in-1 type).

Are there differences in speed with these readers, based on price, brand, etc?

TIA!

 

[spoon2003]

PoohJen,
Do look for hight speed, I have an older one Sandisk that is about 5 years old and it is very slow reading 1 gb card. Dazzle currently has a $15 rebate on their hi-speed reader. I got mine from Dell for $18 before rebate. It is a multi in one but at that price, I don't care.

Sue

 

[Sonno]

Better question would be, what kind of card are you using? What's the speed on it?

 

[PoohJen]

I use a SanDisk Ultra II compact flash.

Okay, I am bitter. I picked up the SanDisk ImageMater reader for CFs. It is VERY fast (especially compared to reading off my camera! Actually, no comparison!), so I'm happy about that but...

The Interface Stinks. If you don't "select all" to transfer, you have to mark each pic individually (for me, tonite, that was 257 clicks, to be exact!). Doesn't respond to standard windows shortcuts like clicking on one and using shift on your last pic to choose all the pics in between. What a pain in the neck!

And it doesn't let me delete pics from the card. (unless I want to delete them all as they are transferred, which I don't always want to do).

Does anyone know of a fast CF reader that has a useful interface and allows you to delete from the card (pick and choose)? Or must I go thru the camera to just delete the bad shots one by one?

gee, I guess I just want it all!

 

[Kelly Grannell]

no, a card reader is a card reader, no interface, no nothing. You can visualize it as a cable. It does nothing but take the data from one end to another. The interface (I believe the Canon software you're using) is a separate software.

I usually download all anyway and under preferences I just choose download new pictures so pictures that have already been downloaded will not be downloaded again.

Also at the end of the session, I usually format my card (in-camera) so deleting files is not a problem for me.

 

[Mellie0119]

I think have the card reader you are talking about.

When I plug my card reader into the USB port on my laptop, it finds it and a window pops up and gives me a few options- I always just browse the folders. It should show up on the "My Computer" section as a removable storage drive- you can also open up the folder from there and view and download the pictures. I never use their program (or Canon's) in the download process- I just copy them from the card to my hard drive.

I don't like the Canon software, so I dumped it a while back. I use Microsoft Photo Editor for simple stuff (like resizing/cropping for web/email purposes) and have a *real* photo editing software to do the more advanced work.

 

[Geoff_M]

no, a card reader is a card reader, no interface, no nothing.

The only asterisk to that is there's a big difference in speed depending on whether the reader is a USB 1.0 vs USB 2.0 reader. However, there aren't many USB 1.0 readers still left on store shelves, but occasionally I see one.

PoohJen, just make sure the packaging reads "USB 2.0" or "High Speed USB". Make sure that the "only one left" reader isn't old stock.

 

[boBQuincy]

Some card readers come with software, to enable things like "one touch downloading" and other barely useful things. I prefer to use them all as another hard drive, then I can copy/paste/delete with ease.

Windows before XP usually requires drivers to see the USB device, with XP it should show up as a drive letter.

Some PCs have a combination of USB 2 and USB 1 ports, some require newer drivers to use USB 2. A USB hub can also get in the way of fast downloading.



boB

 

[PoohJen]

Thanks, y'all.

re: "interface" (as I was using it); I believe it is part of the SanDisk software that was installed to set up the reader. The canon software did have a better interface. But you might be right; I'll check and see exactly what program that interface was running from.

(yes, it is 2.0 - Thanks!)