The Register has an article of interest to us photo buffs: Samsung says it will be able to ship 64GB memory cards in 2008, because of a new process that crams more memory into the same amount of space. Shown are CompactFlash memory cards.
It's of interest, because I wonder if there is much of a market for such a card. I could see professional photographers taking high-rez RAW-format photos at sporting events -- where there isn't time to repeatedly take out and plug in lower-capacity cards. OTOH, wouldn't such an event be better served by transmitting photos from the camera back to the editing room wirelessly?
As for consumers, I think that 512MB and 1GB capacities are sufficient. On recent trips made by family members to Europe and Asia, 512MB was sufficient for all photos taken for trips that lasted 10-14 days. I suppose the sole benefit of 64GB might be for storing long segments of video footage.
Not that your camera can take such memory cards. Most cameras sold today take SD or smaller formats, and they will always lag behind CompactFlash capacities, simply because they are physically smaller.
Even if your camera uses the CompactFlash format (as does my Canon S1is), it's doubtful that its built-in CPU can address 64GB of RAM.