PDA

View Full Version : HELP! CF Card query


PeterD
19th January 2010, 01:43 PM
I recently bought two Kingston CF cards: 4Gb 133x and 8Gb 133x. The former was fitted to my E500 and the latter to my E3.

The above info might just be a coincidence but I mention it just in case.

I have found that the camera image count has been decreasing and, although I delete images I have taken, the number of images available to be saved does not increase back to the full capacity of a blank CF card. It in fact stays at the capacity BEFORE deletion :eek:

I have re-formatted the cards and still no change. Reformatted on the computer (FAT32) and still no change.

Checked with Oly Technical support and went through the same checks and also re-set the camera (E3 only at this stage). I changed the resolution from RAW to jpg and still no change in the number of exposures available:(. This seems to point to a camera problem but the same issue is seen on BOTH cameras which is unusual. Checked both cameras for pin alighnment in the CF slot - no problems. Checked the CF card for errors using the computer - no problems.

Just to gain confidence (in something!) I fitted the original cards to the cameras (both 4Gb) but found the problem persists. Fitted a 1Gb card to the E3 and found that swapping to jpg does increase the available image count but only to the maximum I get with the other cards:(.

Am I missing something? It is unlikely both cameras are faulty and it is unlikely all five cards are faulty.

meach
19th January 2010, 02:13 PM
Do you get the expected full capacity after formatting either in camera or in PC? A useful utility for testing cards (or any other storage device for that matter) is H2TESTW which you can download for free. At least you'll be able to see if the problem is with the cards.

PeterD
19th January 2010, 02:44 PM
Do you get the expected full capacity after formatting either in camera or in PC? A useful utility for testing cards (or any other storage device for that matter) is H2TESTW which you can download for free. At least you'll be able to see if the problem is with the cards.

When formatting the cards the PC says full capacity is available. When formatting in the camera It remains stuck at the number of images after the last shoot. It is always reducing and soon I shall not be able to take any images on ANY card.

I used the memory check program in Windows 7 and it reported no errors found. I shall download the suggested program and try it but I suspect it too will say nothing is wrong.

meach
19th January 2010, 02:51 PM
That points to a camera fault - except you wouldn't expect to suddenly find it on both cameras. Very weird indeed!

PeterD
19th January 2010, 03:09 PM
That points to a camera fault - except you wouldn't expect to suddenly find it on both cameras. Very weird indeed!

Thanks Paul. I have downloaded the program you suggested and it is now running on my Laptop (Vista operating system).

You have come to the same conclusions I have but, I will try anything and will let you know the outcome.

Nick Temple-Fry
19th January 2010, 03:24 PM
Peter

Have you reviewed this thread http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=6906.

The resolution seemed to be to force the camera to recalculate available space which it only does when down to very low number of images available (10 or so). But....???

Nick

Melaka
19th January 2010, 03:36 PM
Peter

Have you reviewed this thread http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=6906.

The resolution seemed to be to force the camera to recalculate available space which it only does when down to very low number of images available (10 or so). But....???

Nick

As the originator of that particular thread I'm happy to say the problem has not recurred and my E3 still gets the frame count right. I can only suggest doing what I did. It might be worth speaking to Oly as this does seem to be more of a camera problem than a card one and it's more than just a one off.

PeterD
19th January 2010, 03:48 PM
Peter

Have you reviewed this thread http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=6906.

The resolution seemed to be to force the camera to recalculate available space which it only does when down to very low number of images available (10 or so). But....???

Nick

Thanks Nick - I had completely forgotten about this posting even though I had replied to it:o. My last comment becomes even more relevant. How about having a sticky to the camera postings to act as a FAQ section Ian.

I am in the process of checking one of the cards out using the program suggested earlier. After that I might well try the other suggested solution. If that is the way forward then it looks as though a firmware fix is URGENTLY required in the cameras.

PeterD
19th January 2010, 04:03 PM
As the originator of that particular thread I'm happy to say the problem has not recurred and my E3 still gets the frame count right. I can only suggest doing what I did. It might be worth speaking to Oly as this does seem to be more of a camera problem than a card one and it's more than just a one off.

Thanks David. I have to agree wholeheartedly with you. I have spoken to Oly before posting this issue and they were puzzled and suggested I send the camera for repair.........that was until I told them that the E500 was behaving the same way;).

I have a feeling that this started when I went for the higher capacity 100Mb/s cards. I wonder if there is a glitch in the camera firmware that is triggered in some way by using this type of card. The firmware between models is unlikely to have changed in the file handling routines and therefore would be a common factor to explore. I shall be letting Oly know whatever the outcome.

PeterD
19th January 2010, 04:11 PM
Latest Update

Testing complete with no errors founf on the CF Card using H2TESTW.

Bearing in mind the latest comments, rather than deleting all the files I loaded the card in the E3. It reported the card was full - good news. I re-formatted the card in the E3 and it came up with 133 images available for a 4Mb card!! That was in RAW. Changed to MN and the capacity remained at 133 .

Time to put on the thinking cap again:eek:

Nick Temple-Fry
19th January 2010, 04:31 PM
I'm not sure that the camera will have recalculated the space available in the same way as it is forced to do when the count gets low in shooting. That calculation route through the code seems to be only triggerred by the 'low remaining' criteria - otherwise the camera works on a stored value (presumably to reduce processor load).

But that's only supposition, as we can't see the code or the various stored values.

Nick

meach
19th January 2010, 05:14 PM
Latest Update

Testing complete with no errors founf on the CF Card using H2TESTW.

Bearing in mind the latest comments, rather than deleting all the files I loaded the card in the E3. It reported the card was full - good news. I re-formatted the card in the E3 and it came up with 133 images available for a 4Mb card!! That was in RAW. Changed to MN and the capacity remained at 133 .

Time to put on the thinking cap again:eek:

Sorry you got the wrong result. But it's worth hanging on to h2testw as you can check any new cards you buy as well as USB pens, especially as there seem to be so many dodgy ones about these days.

Rod Souter
19th January 2010, 09:44 PM
Peter,
I have a new 4GB Kingston x133.

I put it in my E-3 and it tells me space for 159 shots, I have the camera set to RAW+LSF.

Rod

PeterD
19th January 2010, 10:08 PM
Peter,
I have a new 4GB Kingston x133.

I put it in my E-3 and it tells me space for 159 shots, I have the camera set to RAW+LSF.

Rod

Thanks Rod.

When I first had the cards they gave me the expected number of exposures/ I shoot RAW. Now any card I put in gives me the same amount of exposures which is far fewer than expected.
I shall shoot burst tomorrow and hope that Nick's prediction comes true. If not, I will not be able to use the E3 at all:(.

Ian
20th January 2010, 09:34 AM
If you format the card then inspect its capacity using a PC, what does it say? I've picked a formatted card at random from my collection (4GB) and on an E-30 it says 288 RAW frames capacity and on the PC it says 3.91GB free, or 4,201,971,712 bytes free.

I ask this because if the card has bad sectors, a chunk of the card's memory might have been mapped out.

Is the card's format reported as FAT32?

Ian

PeterD
20th January 2010, 10:09 AM
If you format the card then inspect its capacity using a PC, what does it say? I've picked a formatted card at random from my collection (4GB) and on an E-30 it says 288 RAW frames capacity and on the PC it says 3.91GB free, or 4,201,971,712 bytes free.

I ask this because if the card has bad sectors, a chunk of the card's memory might have been mapped out.

Is the card's format reported as FAT32?

Ian

Thanks for replying Ian.

I have checked the 4Gb card using H2TESTW and it reported no errors.
I have checked the 8Gb card again using explorer. It is reporting 7.46Gb free (8,012,957,304 bytes) and 32,768 bytes used. The same amount of used space is shown on the 4Gb card. I have confirmed that the cards are formatted for FAT32. The allocation unit size when formatting on the PC is 32kb (32,768 bytes)

Melaka
20th January 2010, 03:50 PM
I have a feeling that this started when I went for the higher capacity 100Mb/s cards. I wonder if there is a glitch in the camera firmware that is triggered in some way by using this type of card. The firmware between models is unlikely to have changed in the file handling routines and therefore would be a common factor to explore. I shall be letting Oly know whatever the outcome.

I don't think I can tie my experience to a faster card. I use Sandisk III cards in 2 and 4Mb and two of the latter are the 30Mps version. However I always have a 2Mb XD card in my cameras as a backup. With my E3 I was getting the same reading on both cards when I switched from one to t'other. It is this which leads me to believe it is mainly a camera problem. Shooting off enough frames to run the count down to zero and then reformatting in camera solved the problem for me.

PeterD
20th January 2010, 05:24 PM
I don't think I can tie my experience to a faster card. I use Sandisk III cards in 2 and 4Mb and two of the latter are the 30Mps version. However I always have a 2Mb XD card in my cameras as a backup. With my E3 I was getting the same reading on both cards when I switched from one to t'other. It is this which leads me to believe it is mainly a camera problem. Shooting off enough frames to run the count down to zero and then reformatting in camera solved the problem for me.

Thanks David.

I shall try that out when the weather improves though as I want to get something from the task in case it fails. There is a great deal of similarity in symptoms to those you experienced. I shall remain positive*yes

Nick Temple-Fry
1st February 2010, 01:36 PM
Its been a week now, has our well intentioned advice inadvertently bricked Peters camera?

Is/was the solution totally different?

Nick

PeterD
1st February 2010, 05:22 PM
Its been a week now, has our well intentioned advice inadvertently bricked Peters camera?

Is/was the solution totally different?

Nick

Nick,

This afternoon I went out to take the remaining 50 exposures. Shot them all off and got the zero images left display. Erased the images with my fingers crossed and found I had 462 images available on the card:D. Whilst I am obviously happy, and grateful for your advice, I am not at all pleased with this fault condition:eek:
I shall be writing to Olympus about this and also say that I am not alone in experiencing this problem. I hope that they will be able to provide an explanation and also a fix. Remember, my E500 has exactly the same fault but I have not yet taken the counter to zero on that camera.

Nick Temple-Fry
1st February 2010, 06:08 PM
Nick,

This afternoon I went out to take the remaining 50 exposures. Shot them all off and got the zero images left display. Erased the images with my fingers crossed and found I had 462 images available on the card:D. Whilst I am obviously happy, and grateful for your advice, I am not at all pleased with this fault condition:eek:
I shall be writing to Olympus about this and also say that I am not alone in experiencing this problem. I hope that they will be able to provide an explanation and also a fix. Remember, my E500 has exactly the same fault but I have not yet taken the counter to zero on that camera.

Well it's good news that the E-3 is behaving itself again, hopefully the E-500 will chose to follow suit.

You are right this needs to be raised with Olympus, I hope you will keep us informed as to the response.

Nick

PeterD
2nd February 2010, 04:20 PM
Hi all,

Just had a discussion with Olympus Support and I have been given a solution to this problem that does NOT need you to fire off all shots until the counter returns to zero:D.

I have not had an explanation as to why the cameras behave this way but at least we now have a way forward. If your counter sticks and continues to decrease as they have in both my E3 and E500, carry out the following-

E500 :- Menu/spanner2/FileName/RESET

E3 :- Menu/spanner 1/spanner h/File Name/RESET


Ian
Please could you arrange that this is added to the site faq. It would seem to be applicable to the E3 and E500 but I guess to all of the E series. It has also affected other members.

I have asked Olympus Support to look into this and perhaps put some guidelines out themselves.

Melaka
2nd February 2010, 05:47 PM
If you've set your own file names (as I do for the first two digits) will they have to be reset as well I wonder.

PeterD
3rd February 2010, 08:09 AM
If you've set your own file names (as I do for the first two digits) will they have to be reset as well I wonder.

Hi David,

I guess you would have to set up the file naming again following the reset. Olympus should look again at this issue as it seems to be a problem across the whole E series of cameras. The 'fix' I posted will at least quickly change things to allow normal operation again. It is really frustrating when the camera decides to go in count-down mode regardless of the which card is inserted and whatever size the card is:eek:

I shall let you know if I hear any more about this fault.