[ibike2work]

Personally, I like the convenience of removing, transporting and connecting an SD card to a computer. To me, it's easier than hooking up to the camera. If the computer is bluetooth capable, then it would be fine, although I can envision slowness issues in browsing if thousands of photos are stored.

[Kunzite]

An interesting thread.
There's no doubt, consumer-level SSDs are surpassing the performance requirements of a camera like the K-3iii. Let's take a lowly 2.5" SATA SSD - with 560MB/sec, writing a 35MB RAW file takes an instant. As for the expected reliability, a 256MB Samsung EVO is good up to 150TB; that's quite a bit more frames than what you could reasonably shoot with a camera
But, would those numbers translate from the PC's context into a camera's? An earlier comment mentioned power requirement. This SSD I've mentioned can get these values by using a lot of "tricks", including a 512MB DRAM/cache and a very smart controller. If you can't do that, everything suffers - performance, reliability. Decreasing capacity makes things worse, too.

At the other end of the spectrum there's the internal storage which isn't much different than of a SD card's. The GRiii has 2GB available (although not simultaneously with a SD card). Good for when you forget your SD cards at home, but not for much else.
I don't really trust those, and yeah they work so well in smartphones... which are devices you'd throw away in 6 months or so

If feasible, I might probably like a "type 1" SSD, fast and reliable, to solve the buffer issues once and for all.
I wouldn't give up on the external storage though. Internal storage would have to be an option, not mandatory.

But perhaps the solution is switching to faster cards (SD or not).

[TDvN57]

I see Leica's latest release the 64mpx range finder M11 has 64gB internal storage and one SD card. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1682569-REG/leica_m11b_m11_rangefinde...981&


Perhaps the technology is going to drag us in the direction of internal storage, even though some might be kicking and screaming along the way :-)

[Roland Karlsson]

I think the decision by Leica is reasonable. 64 GB is not enough as the only storage, but the camera CAN be used without an SD card. You can probably also get redundancy for the first 64 GB if you have an SD card.

It would have been more annoying if the camera had an internal 512 GB of memory and no SD slot.

There are three reasons for me calling it annoying.

1. I like to have my own method for retrieving pictures. A method that is independent of camera I use. So, I want to use an external card reader. From camera reading tends to use some special method with a special software. I do absolutely not like that. Some cameras can be used as card readers though. Then it is less annoying.

NOTE - that even if the flash memory in the camera looks like an Explorer folder, it probably is not mounted in the file system. Which you will be aware of if you have a program that tries to download the images. It cannot find them. That is because the camera maker has made some Explorer magics to display the folder. It is not really there. Smoke and mirrors.

NOTE - the camera might die if I change OS or my OS is upgraded, if downloading files from teh camera uses some special software from the manufacturer. Or that Explorer Magic.

2. I want to be in control of how many/large memories I have. Maybe I want to get fast and large and many SD cards.

3. It happens that SD card fails. If the internal one fails, then the camera is dead, if you do not have a memory slot.

---

Last edited by Roland Karlsson; 03-05-2022 at 03:02 AM.

[Lord Lucan]

I like to have my own method for retrieving pictures. A method that is independent of camera I use. .... From camera reading tends to use some special method with a special software. I do absolutely not like that.

I second that. By having the SD card as the intermediate transfer medium, the procedure is obliged to follow at that point a widely used and standardised format which will be around for a long time - at least longer than any one camera, piece of software, computer operating system, or proprietory cloud.

While there were some other types of card in the earler days such as SmartMedia cards, there has been a settling on SD cards, and even the Mini and Micro versions can be fitted within an SD adaptor. There is not much to be gained in further changing the shape and size of the standard SD card because it is an optimum fit between thumb and forefinger. I believe it will be around for some time and future development will be in its speed and capacity.

Cutting the SD card out of the loop is saving at most a few seconds and/or dumbing things down, but at the cost of locking us into proprietory systems and software, although I'm sure that some companies would love exactly that.

[normhead]

I don't use larger than 64 MB cards, but I mostly use 32 GB cards, because large uploads of over 32 GB will crash my PP software. I'm not even going to describe the ridiculous work arounds I have gone through with 64 GB cards, but suffice to say, I've stopped buying them. I'm always for a solution that doesn't involve putting all your eggs in one basket. Simply, I'd rather come back from a trip with 2 32s than one 64.

So, does anyone really need my opinion on 1 TB internal storage? It's pretty obvious. But, I'm sure it's great for people with 2 TB of internal storage and 64 GB of memory in their computers. I have no intention of ever owning a machine like that. But who know, Bill gates did say 64 MB was all anyone would ever need. Smarter people than me have fudged what standard computers will look like 10 years down the road.

[riffraffselbow]

I don't use larger than 64 MB cards, but I mostly use 32 GB cards, because large uploads of over 32 GB will crash my PP software. I'm not even going to describe the ridiculous work arounds I have gone through with 64 GB cards, but suffice to say, I've stopped buying them. I'm always for a solution that doesn't involve putting all your eggs in one basket. Simply, I'd rather come back from a trip with 2 32s than one 64.

So, does anyone really need my opinion on 1 TB internal storage? It's pretty obvious. But, I'm sure it's great for people with 2 TB of internal storage and 64 GB of memory in their computers. I have no intention of ever owning a machine like that. But who know, Bill gates did say 64 MB was all anyone would ever need. Smarter people than me have fudged what standard computers will look like 10 years down the road.

He didn't really say it, but the quote was actually about 640 kbytes :P

[Roland Karlsson]

He didn't really say it, but the quote was actually about 640 kbytes :P

Yes, the Quote was regarding 640 kB, and he did never say it. He said something else, that got obfuscated to this. It is fake history.

[photogem]

Yes, the Quote was regarding 640 kB, and he did never say it. He said something else, that got obfuscated to this. It is fake history.

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bill_Gates:

Often attributed to Gates in 1981. Gates considered the IBM PC's 640 KB program memory a significant breakthrough over 8-bit systems that were typically limited to 64 KB, but he has denied making this remark:
"I've said some stupid things and some wrong things, but not that. No one involved in computers would ever say that a certain amount of memory is enough for all time ... I keep bumping into that silly quotation attributed to me that says 640 K of memory is enough. There's never a citation; the quotation just floats like a rumor, repeated again and again."


Anyway: I use several SD-cards and as well 2 x 128MB/s SanDisk Extreme. Never had any problems with them.

But I had failing SD cards as well but never had any damage to any SD cardslot ever.

I hardly use direct connection of the Pentax to my PC nor labtop and would find it a nuicance if I had to.

I had 3 failing card-readers (all interior), one was just too old, no modern drivers anymore.


Cardreaders and SD cards can be replaced, are not expensive.


But an onboard SSD within the DSLR is a very bad idea, almost as bad as onboard batteries such as in smartphones, labtops etc.
The latter: Cheap and stupid!

[TDvN57]

I see the new Hasselblad X2D 100c has only one CF express card and a 1TB m.2 SSD built in with a USB C connection to download files.

Perhaps the time to ditch SD cards is coming.

[reh321]

I see the new Hasselblad X2D 100c has only one CF express card and a 1TB m.2 SSD built in with a USB C connection to download files.

Perhaps the time to ditch SD cards is coming.

I hope not.
Maybe we’ll move to the really small ones {micro ones?},
but I really dislike depending on something not replaceable.

[Rondec]

I see the new Hasselblad X2D 100c has only one CF express card and a 1TB m.2 SSD built in with a USB C connection to download files.

Perhaps the time to ditch SD cards is coming.

It looks like that costs 8100 dollars. A bit different than the level of camera most of us can afford.

[photoptimist]

Removable memory reduces risks of data loss -- if the camera breaks, is lost, has a data corruption event, or gets stolen, then less data is lost if the photographer uses removable cards and swaps with some frequency.

Removable memory enables higher-volume workflows -- a card swap lets the photographer keep shooting while an assistant downloads the card(s) and begins post processing.

Removable memory enables less down time for shooting -- even with USB C, swapping cards is faster than connecting the camera and waiting while it downloads.

The added cost of removable memory is negligible in the grand scheme -- is anyone really going to tie-break between two high-spec cameras and buy the model with no card slot because the slot-less camera is $30 cheaper?

[biz-engineer]

but I really dislike depending on something not replaceable.

Internal memory, like the mechanical shutter, may be replaceable for a few years.

It looks like that costs 8100 dollars. A bit different than the level of camera most of us can afford.

Back when the 645Z , it seemed I couldn't afford to buy a medium format kit. Looking back, I bought a K1 and K1II new (that's 4000+), I bought 9 DFA lenses new (that's over 10000+), tripods, filters... I with that money I could have easily bought a 645z and lenses. Sometimes we spill the money wide on cameras and lenses that aren't essential, don't get as much use, when you could just focus the money on core equipment. When I see how frequent apsc camera upgrades are, I can find a lot of customers who say they can't afford medium format who actually spent more on apsc.

[Lord Lucan]

Maybe we’ll move to the really small ones {micro ones?},

Doubt it. Those things are a PITA to handle and easy to lose if dropped. The standard SD card is ergomonically perfect for holding between finger and thumb. There is no reason for a smaller card unless it is for a very small device - such as a dashcam, which needs to be as small as possible, and which neither itself nor its card need regular handling)