Attached Link: 64GB and 100GB CF Cards

Yes, impressive.  Also faster. 

I found this review on the largest CF,

The 333x 32GB and 233x 64GB are due to ship now, for $630 and
$400, and the 233x 100GB and 333x 50GB by the end of the year.

Yes, impressive ... and pricey, too. 

--
Martin

I can hear it now.....I shot 2 million pictures in one day and only got 3 keepers! :rolleyes:

Y'know what they say about "keeping all your eggs in ONE basket"  kinda applies here!

Lol at Joe!! Seems utterly pointless to me

I wouldn't laugh.
Many people keep their works on an external hard disk They consider it a safe backup, but all harddisks crash.
Others prefer CD's or DVD's. But home-burnt disks will become unreadable.

SolidState memory, as used in memory sticks and CF cards have an average lifespan of 2million hours. There's nothing mechanical, so no risk of crashing.

OCZ has a 32GB SSD disk in laptop-size (2,5inch) which is much, much faster than the WDRaptor, and consumes as good as nothing.

I agree that I don't see myself putting a 100GB CFCard in my camera in the near future, but for the moment those CFcards, memory sticks and SSdisks are the safest backup or storage you can get.

On that same line of thought ...

Take a look at this adapter,

Century DIY SSD Now Goes Up to 2TB (in Theory)

Century's SATA adapter supports 3 CF cards

and a little more detail,

DIY SSD SATA for $175. 

With 3 CF devices installed, RAID-5 is supported. 

--
Martin

I dont quite follow how CF Cards are safe backups? The very purpose of them is to format and use again and at that price you could buy quite a few 500gb HD    The wear and tear on HD if used only to backup photographs has proved for me to be very reliable, and I  double them up just to be sure..  

One way to predict the relative safety of your data is to look at MTBF for the various media that you might use. 

For example, SanDisk has announced industrial grade CF devices with an MTBF of 3 million hours -- that is 342 years.  Non-industrial grade have a MTBF of 1 million hours -- or 113 years. 

By contrast, HDD offer somewhat lower MTBF.  As an example, the Seagate Baracuda 7200.10 series has an MTBF of 700,000 hours -- 80 years. 

BTW, a high MTBF does not (can not) guarantee that YOU will never see a failure -- or that a particular device will work for as long as the MTBF predicts.  All that it can say is that on a statistical basis and considering many of those devices, that is the statistically expected average working life of the device.  ... and if the device receives Percussive Maintenance (also known as a Technical Tap), the MTBF of that device may change.  [grin]

Doing the backups to 2 different devices protects you against 1 failure ... provided that when you see the failure, you promptly obtain a replacement device and copy your data onto it. 

BTW, the WIKI article raises some questions about the use of MTBF as a reliability indicator. 

--
Martin

Actually, I see a use for this, but not with photography...

I'm eagerly awaiting the release of the Red Scarlet camera which will shoot 3K video using a CMOS sensor, and will record to CF cards (there's 2 slots in the back).

Now, they've JUST changed their thoughts on it, and it's being revamped or something (please please please have a removable PL lens mount instead of a built-in lens!!!) but hopefully it'll still record to CF cards.

This would mean a LOT more footage can be captured for a reasonable price range (yes, less than $1,000 is reasonable for this).
-Lew ;-)

Wow Martin you certainly have researched the topic well!  Like most new technology I guess this will prove of more value in the future, though how they come up with such statistics for reliability is a mystery and who is going to be around in 342 years or the 112 or 80 years to say they got it wrong..

Rare for me to have a computer or HD longer than 3 years at best before it is so out of date to seemingly be worthless.. One thing for sure though that the Flash cards are reliable in the extreme and in time with the rate of progress we will be carrying all our data on them. But again I am sure this way well be old hat again in an even shorter time

I'm still waiting for my 50 gigapixel Occular implant, So I can take pics whenever I THINK about it!  LOL!

I guess as with all Techology, things evolve quickly....now with 15+ megapixel cams  starting to hit the market more storage will be needed to hold the pics.   Video also takes alot of space, especially HD stuff....so I can see where these cards will be useful.   Once the price goes down 100 gigs will be the norm.

Until then...Manufacturers know there will always someone who has to have the lastest thing....no matter how much it cost and they're banking on that mentality!

The way things are going the Terra Bites cards won't be long away.

It's not the question of having that 100GB card in your camera and paste it to an external disk when it's full, but it's the type of storage that makes this so innovative. ALL harddisks will crash. It's just a question of when. And yes, you can play Polyanna and live on a cloud that it will never happen to you.  But those fast rotating disks will crash sooner or later, and unfortunately always sooner that-n you think/hope.
This kind of memory is much more reliable as there are no mechanical parts spinning.
It will be a huge step ahed once it's affordable.

I've had an external HDD crash, and no, it was not connected all the time.
Since then I don't trust them anymore.

Just give me the money and i'll upgrade to solid state... looks great and not just for reliability and power consumption but for read/write times (i play games too and having one as a dedicated scratch disk for photoshop might be rather nice too )!  Already oggled at an upgrade to my system to incorporate an ocz solid state drive (SSD)...

shame about the relative price difference between HD and SSD GB's  :sad:

I think I would much sooner have a number of smaller cards then one big one, I have the Fuji S9600, with two different format cards.  One is a 2gb XD and also a 2gb CF, obviously the CF is the primary card and at 300x  is much faster, I also have a couple spare CF cards with the same speed rating on them.  I have also some memory sticks that I use to back up and transport my images the biggest being a 16gb.   I have three HD's in my computer one of which is a dedicated back up, I also have an external 350 gb HD which is used for back up of photo's and zip programs.  I have had one HD crash on me quite a few years back and I lost quite a few years of photo's that had not been backed up, because of that I now have three copies of more or less everything thats on my pc.

I used to play Polyana like tanchelyn suggests, but now its a matter of 'Once bitten twice shy'.  Even now I do not feel 100% bullet proof.  Memory for the camera though, I think 8GB is the largest I would go for.

Another thing you have to factor in is the price per GB of CF cards... when i was looking to get some more storage (long term trip with no laptop) the 4GB option was the best bang for your buck.  4x 1GB cards are a lot more expensive than 1x 4GB card... although interesting to note i just had a look on the website i used and they dont sell Sandisk ExIII CF at 1GB any more!  You are still paying £30 for 4 gigs if you use two cards as opposed to £20 if you just use one card...