Import: Connect Camera vs. Insert SD Card?

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Thanks for your reply, Bart.  It's interesting, but I want to clarify what you mean by low level format.  You can "quick" format which is just a table update, or you can do a full high level format (which takes a long time for large devices), or you can do a low level format (which is rarely done, other than at the factory - in fact, on a modern IDE/ATA or SCSI drive you can't do a low level format from your computer and if you did, it would basically just destroy the drive from being usable).

So I presume what you mean is a full high level format, rather than a genuine low level format.

No, a real low level format is what it is, it will not just reset the FAT directory entries, but it will additionally overwrite all cells as well (making sure that that can be done reliably or mark cells as bad). It's that additional overwriting that uses up one more of the available number of writes. A Quick Format simply sets a few flags and adds memory cells to the end of the queue of available cells, without also actually overwriting them at that time.

One should not have to do such a low level format (after a first time when starting to use a new card), unless the card is getting bad, unreliable. The only thing is that we do not know how cameras format, unless it's a user selectable option like in the camera models I mentioned. I assume that without user selectable options, the formatting will be a simple Quick Format, but I do not know for sure. It would be much clearer if the option would be labeled "Delete all" instead of simply "Format" (which can mean different things if not specified). At least the Canons that I mentioned (and probably several other models too) make it clear that something else will happen when the "Low Level" option is checked.

I could see a real low level format causing issues, but not a full high level or quick high level format, other than the wear related to writing to every block with a full high level format.

Yes, and it may also depend a bit on whether one fills a card before low level formatting or not. Low level formatting will shorten the lifespan of all cells, while just writing images to part of the card's cells will only affect those cells needed, and wear leveling will make sure that new writes are done to the lesser used cells first, so they will all wear at the same pace. But there should be no reason to use low level formatting each time anyway. Just make sure it is switched off, if the user has control over that.

I can't see any reason why anyone would attempt a real low level format on a modern drive or memory card unless their intent was to make it inoperable, so I doubt that cameras are doing that.  They probably just have a quick or full high level option (and there's no need to ever do a full one - that stopped being useful when drives got larger than about 100GB (because it just took too long and didn't really provide any benefits.

The only reasons I can think of are, when starting to use a new card for the first time, to make sure that at the camera voltages/currents used for writing, there are no unreliable cells detected. In the interim, one could need it to be a bit more secure when cards are going to be used by other people (it's amazing what can be recovered from a Quick Formatted card). And maybe at a later date when unreliable writes/reads start to occur (although that may also be an interface, or camera firmware issue).

I don't want to make a drama out of it, but I just want to make sure that people understand what they are doing if they choose a convenient way to free up a card's memory.

Cheers,
Bart

[Farmer]

I agree it's not a big drama :-)  I still think that there's some confusion over low level and high level (quick or full) formatting.  I really doubt that any camera is doing a real low level format.  Such things pretty much went the way of the dinosaurs after MFM drives went extinct, other than at the factory.  So a high level full format will definitely "use up" some of the wear, but neither it not a quick high level format should reset the wear table.

You are right, though, that users should know that there is a usage cost for these actions.  Fortunately, storage prices have come down.  My first 1GB HDD (a Quantum Fireball SCSI drive for my Amiga 2000), cost me $1,000- in 1992 and it was, of course, a full 5.25" size device!

[JoachimStrobel]

Last time I took the card out and then placed it back into the camera, it did not connect well. I took the first 10 shoots wondering what this little red warning box meant, that appeared somewhere on the side. The shutter would work great, just did not take any photos. Happened with a Sony A7ii. I never take that card out again.

[Avalanche]

Most of this advice is probably based on the slow speed transfer of early cameras and is not relevant any more. You need to peel of the cover of the USB port which may be a nuisance with some cameras.  Maybe they were concerned that those covers would not sit as tight as the could if you open them regularly. I have never had an USB connector come loose or any pins broken on any device. It doesn't mean that does not happen, just that it is rather rare. It's more common that a cable breaks but that's more likely to happen because of the twisting you do before stashing it in a camera bag.

I also do not believe that a camera will format cards any better than the computer would do. The file system used on those cards is simple and well understood. Before every major project, I do overwrite all cards with zeros (e.g. diskutil zeroDisk on Mac). The idea is to detect any bad blocks on the card that can't be remapped anymore by writing worthless zeros instead of precious images. As long as you're not a professional sports photographer, you'll probably never reach the possible lifetime data volume of your cards so they should rarely break because of wear, if at all. I still have some 512MB cards that work fine. They are just not much use with those 85MByte files that modern cameras produce...