Most Helpful Customer Reviews
31 of 32 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Fastest USB 2.0 SD reader IF you have the right SD card., February 19, 2009
This review is from: ImageMate® Multi-Card USB 2.0 Reader (Personal Computers)
<Update 11/15/2011 - I just downgraded this review by 1 star. The quality is not high enough over the long run. We eventually stopped using this card reader and I am about to throw it away. My wife does not trust it. I have seen it more than once come up with a message "you will get faster speeds if you plug it into a USB 2.0 port" when I have nothing but USB 2.0 ports. AND with this latest SD card SanDisk Extreme SD 32 GB SDHC Flash Memory Card SDSDX-032G, I see no difference at all between the performance of this reader vs the lexar reader. Lexar Dual-Slot USB 2.0 Flash Memory Card Reader RW035-001 > I recently purchased a Canon Vixia HF100 camcorder and knew the files would be HUGE, so I was looking for the fastest SD card download set up I could find.
I initially bought the Lexar Pro UDMA Dual-Slot Reader and a SanDisk 16GB Extreme III 30MB/s SDHC card hoping for at least 20MB/s performance. Alas, the Lexar reader only gave me 10 to 18 MB/s performance on this SDHC card. Then purchased the SanDisk All In One Reader (SDDR-189-A20) and I achieve 17MB/s, which is no where near the 30MB/s advertised. According to robgalbraith.com:
Unlike the ImageMate Multi-Card reader, the ImageMate All-in-One doesn't include support for the proprietary data timing mode found in SanDisk's Extreme III 30MB/s Edition SDHC. This means it doesn't deliver an extra speed boost when paired with one of these specific cards. So I then purchased this Multi-Card reader (SDDR-199-A20), which is basically a 1 slot version of the 3 slot SDDR189, which is supposed to have thi proprietary data timing mode. On my Dell XPS600 with Windows XP SP3 with Norton IS2009 turned off, downloading a 1GB movie takes
55 seconds - 18MB/s - on the SDDR189 and the Lexar (close enough to rank together)
41 seconds - 24MB/s - on this SDDR199
43 seconds - 23MB/s - from my USB 2.0 hard drive
31 seconds - 31MB/s - from that same hard drive via firewire 400 ()
10 seconds - 95MB/s - from my external esata hard drive () Considering that a typical download is 2 to 5 GB, we are talking about saving several minutes here. I am somewhat disappointed that Canon (and everyone else) seems to be moving away from the CF format to the SD format as we knew from day one that the CF specification allowed for a much faster data transfer and that files will only get bigger.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
7 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Not close to specified throughput, July 25, 2009
This review is from: ImageMate® Multi-Card USB 2.0 Reader (Personal Computers)
I've used and get good performance from a Sandisk Extreme USB 2.0 Reader that handles CF as well as SD and MS Pro Duo. This unit the Image Mate -199 is rated at 27 MB/sec write, but I never achieved close to this throughput with a SandDisk Extreme III 30 MB/sec-rated SD memory card. I got 17-MB/sec write speed on two computers, a Core 2 Duo 2.4 GHz and a i7-920 OC'ed to 3.5-GHz. I got similar write speed with a Lexar 133X (20 MB/sec) SD card. Read speed for both cards was 19 MB/sec. These speeds were with 250-MB jpg files, not small 4-MB camera files which would show an even slower rate.
It's got a nice form-factor and looks good. However I purchased it for speed, reading 4- and 8-GB SD cards holding large video files. It is exasperating to purchase a product from a reputable manufacturer sold through a reputable vendor only to find it misses its specification by 40%. It's all about making money, apparently.
Don't purchase this reader for its speed. And in the future take any product specs from Sandisk as only claimed. Demo'ed and tested is something else, and this reader fails that standard.
Now I question the true speed of my Sandisk Extreme III SD card - it's a 30-MB/sec card only if I have a 30-MB/sec card reader or if someone has validated that speed. So it's speed rating is probably bogus as well.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
7 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Very pleased, but could be better..., June 11, 2009
This review is from: ImageMate® Multi-Card USB 2.0 Reader (Personal Computers)
I have about 1/2 dozen card readers, and this one is by far the best performance and most-compatible. I experienced no compatibility hick-ups. I got 20MB/s read/write (via ATTO) on a SanDisk Extreme III card rated for 20MB/s. On another reader, I only got about 5MB/s. On yet others, ATTO wouldn't even complete the tests without errors. So, functionally, I give it 5 stars. Note that I guess this test is sort of biased since I am using two SanDisk products.
Next, this is a lot smaller than you would expect: about 2-1/4" by 1-1/2" by maybe 1/4". It is rather tiny and uses a mini-USB connector on the back. Unfortunately, I feel SanDisk spent half the cost on a gimmicky stand, packaging, and a dorky USB cable. The USB cable that it comes with is cheap, black, and ugly and has a huge ferrite bead on it. Considering how small and light the reader is, the cable dwarfs it, and its stiffness knocks the stand over. Also, the stand is gorgeous -- nicely finished and well-made, but I knew I wouldn't like it because it is just one more thing vying for desktop space that is going to get in the way and collect dust. In comparison, the case of the reader is pure cheap. It is a glossy thin plastic which does not impress. It came with a lot of scratches and wear marks in the glossy finish just from rubbing around in the packaging. I wound up not using any of the accessories and just attaching the reader to the side of my monitor with double-stick tape. I think SanDisk should have invested in making the card-reader case a lot nicer and/or provide a thin, sleek USB cable that does not knock the unit over. So, I give it 2 stars for quality/feel/looks (not counting the stand).
Since nice looking but functionally useless products are not my bag, I give it 4 stars overall (with functionality more heavily weighted).
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|