Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

My posts · My subscriptions
  

  Previous versions of sjms's message #11602403 « Lexar 800x vs 1000x in Canon 1Dx »

  

sjms
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
Re: Lexar 800x vs 1000x in Canon 1Dx


TimMunsey wrote:
Yeah lexar are very naughty to name the 800x as they did, it's a misleading partial truth.


this was an issue that I brought up a few years back. it was a method used by second tier maker so they would "look" more competitive in their products performance.

Transcend was one of the earliest adopters and Lexar followed about a year later with in less solid data. reads are so much easier to improve on since they are less power consumptive. you need to go to each companies site to read between the asterisks. for the real data

it is a shame that these so called specifications tend to be dealt with in a "fast and loose" manner and the issue fairly pervasive throughout the consumer electronics industry. they are not lies, just not consistent fact.

the technical limits of parallel processing tech in CF has been pretty much reached and there will be change soon. Sandisk along with canon is pushing SATA. Lexar, Sony and Nikon is doing the XQD dance. from my perspective I see limits in the SATA arena where XQD uses the PCIe bus which has greater open ended potential. but in the end they all will come out with something new and different that we all must have





Jun 06, 2013 at 11:55 AM
sjms
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
Re: Lexar 800x vs 1000x in Canon 1Dx


TimMunsey wrote:
Yeah lexar are very naughty to name the 800x as they did, it's a misleading partial truth.


this was an issue that I brought up a few years back. it was a method used by second tier maker so they would "look" more competitive in their products performance.

Transcend was one of the earliest adopters and Lexar followed about a year later with in less solid data. reads are so much easier to improve on since they are less power consumptive. you need to go to each companies site to read between the asterisks. for the real data

it is a shame that these so called specifications tend to be dealt with in a "fast and loose" manner and the issue fairly pervasive throughout the consumer electronics industry.





Jun 06, 2013 at 11:40 AM
sjms
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
Re: Lexar 800x vs 1000x in Canon 1Dx


TimMunsey wrote:
Yeah lexar are very naughty to name the 800x as they did, it's a misleading partial truth.


this was an issue that I brought up a few years back. it was a method used by second tier maker so they would "look" more competitive in their products performance.

Transcend was one of the earliest adopters and Lexar followed about a year later with in less solid data. reads are so much easier to improve on since they are less power consumptive. you need to go to each companies site to read between the asterisks. for the real data

it is a shame that these so called specifications tend to be dealt with in a "fast and loose" manner and the issue fairly pervasive throughout the consumer electronics industry.





Jun 06, 2013 at 11:28 AM



  Previous versions of sjms's message #11602403 « Lexar 800x vs 1000x in Canon 1Dx »