While I love the specs of the 1D MK II I notice 2 points which either surely must be an error or someone in Canon's technical department must have a few brain cells missing.
1) USB 1.1 -- who uses this anymore -- even a rock bottom computer you can buy in TESCO ( Large UK supermarket chain -- primarily food !!) for almost nothing ("Buy 1 and get 1 free" type of stuff) has USB 2.0 on it. -- Camera has firewire as well for tethered shooting but USB 1.1 -- why bother as it's a waste of space.
2) The spec "implied" that 2GB was the maximum size of microdrive / CF card that could be used even though FAT 32 was supported.
Perhaps this is due to having to support SD type cards as well and there aren't any 4GB ones around yet.
The 1Ds also appeared to have a 2GB limitation -- but I've had no probs with a 4GB card so maybe it's a mistake on the specs.
The software might be OK this time -- although I've yet to see software from Canon that is even worth the value of the CD it's supplied with.
Interesting to see if Adobe updates CS which I've just bought
But USB 1. 1 --- really Canon -- let's hope this was a mistake.
But in spite of that I'm just going to LOVE this camera and it is going to be WiFi enabled in the future -- another great idea that should have come earlier.
The spec "implied" that 2GB was the maximum size of microdrive / CF card that could be used even though FAT 32 was supported.
Perhaps this is due to having to support SD type cards as well and there aren't any 4GB ones around yet.
The 1Ds also appeared to have a 2GB limitation -- but I've had no probs with a 4GB card so maybe it's a mistake on the specs.
The specs actually say that it supports cards up to 2048 GB, which I and others initially misread as 2048 MB (2 GB).
The 1Ds supports FAT32, and thus CF cards >2 GB. There have apparently been some reports of the new Hitachi 4 GB microdrives not working in some 1Ds cameras. Canon has stated publicly that they are investigating the issue, which apparently is not universal as other 1Ds owners report no problems with the new Hitachi microdrives.
There's an article on RG that addresses the 4GB microdrive issue. The upshot, apparently, is that you need to format initially in FAT32 using Win2k, not XP, and thereafter the camera will happily recognize the drive.
Just to avoid any confusion about the capability to read 4Gb disks: there is no limitation until 2 Terabyte. Listen to Nill he is right. If a disk is formatted in FAT32 the 1D series will recognize the large microdisk like the 4Gb Hitachi and others with no problems. Some MD come preformatted with another file allocation table format than FAT32 or have been used in FAT16 devices before and will not show. A reformat under FAT32 will solve the problem.
PictBridge works over USB. That is the main reason why the new camera has a USB I/O connection. As printers that do support PictBridge work over USB and in general are not fast I/O devices anyway (the mechanics of the printhead and stepmotors for the paperfeed are the slowest components) the choice of a USB 1.1. connector is a logical step. The Firewire connection does the high speed I/O.
Peter de Weerdt wrote:
... If a disk is formatted in FAT32 the 1D series will recognize the large microdisk like the 4Gb Hitachi and others with no problems. ...
Just to clarify -- I'm reasonably sure that the 1D does *not* support FAT32 and more than 2GB. The 1Ds does, the 10D does, and according to the specs, so does the 1D II.
Nill you are right of course. I meant to say the current 1D series. The old 1D supports FAT16. To make your list complete: the 300D does support FAT32 as well.
Nill Toulme wrote:
Just to clarify -- I'm reasonably sure that the 1D does *not* support FAT32 and more than 2GB. The 1Ds does, the 10D does, and according to the specs, so does the 1D II.
Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
I've been thinking about this since the 1D MkII came out: We have to start calling it something short, yet not confusing. How about "Mark II"? What say you? For example: Q:"What do you shoot?" A: "Mark II."
rudiphoto wrote:
I've been thinking about this since the 1D MkII came out: We have to start calling it something short, yet not confusing. How about "Mark II"? What say you? For example: Q:"What do you shoot?" A: "Mark II."
I've been thinking similarly, but I think "Mark II" presumes too much, not to mention sounding pretentious and somewhat Lincolnesque. As I see it, the choices are 1DII, 1D II, 1D-II, 1D2, or R2D2. It'd be nice to standardize if only for purposes of searching the fora, but 1D2 is the easiest one(D) to type.
?
