Lexar Announces New Professional CFexpress USB 3.1 Reader
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
No price for it... it will be a significant cost for CFe and USH II cards for the R5 plus a card reader. If the R5 comes with 5GHz wifi, what would be the likely transfer rates to your PC? Is a card reader necessary?
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 381342
Guest
USB-C to USB-C will be faster than Wifi I would think. But even then there are CFE readers for under £300 on TB3(much faster than this, suggesting this should be quite cheep)
Upvote
0
$49.99
www.bhphotovideo.com
Lexar CFexpress USB 3.1 Reader
Buy Lexar CFexpress USB 3.1 Reader featuring For Photo and Video Professionals, 1 x CFexpress Type B Card Slot, 10 Gb/s USB 3.1 Gen 2 Type-C Interface, Transfer Raw 4K Video, Includes USB Type-C to Type-A Cable. Review Lexar null
www.bhphotovideo.com
Upvote
0
Agreed that USB C will be the fastest option but I am wondering if wifi 5GHz will be reasonable to avoid buying a card reader up front. I am hoping that wifi 5GHz will be faster than using a standard SD card reader for instance.
Happy to buy one later but there will be some big one-time costs to jump into RF for me.
Upvote
0
Wired transfers will always be faster than wireless transfer. The USB-C will likely be 5Gbps speed, while the wireless being max 800Mbps. Assuming 2x2 AC MIMO config. If the camera only has one stream it will be max 350Mbps. This is also theoretical max of the wireless protocol. Practical speeds are always lower. A standard SD reader can read at 100MB/s, or around 1Gbps. A USH-II reader can go up to 300MB/s, or around 3Gbps. Far faster than what wireless can do. Wireless is only good if you offload a picture or two to your phone for quick transfer. Not full cards.
Relying on wireless as your main connection will be painfully slow to unload a full card. Especially given that the R5 shoots 45MP stills.
Upvote
0
great information and fair enough!
I'm not familiar with CRAW/.CR3 which is likely to be on the R5. The 5DS/R RAW files were about 60Mb in size and if I understand correctly, the CR3 files will replace mRaw and sRAW but they are using a lossy compression algorithm.
Does anyone have experience if the differences between CR3 and CR2 is quality? it looks to be a ~40% file size difference which will add up if shooting 20fps @ 45 Mp
Upvote
0
If they are cheap, I'd probably consider getting one. The speed will be fast enough for me, I seldom download more than 1000 or 1500 images at a time, so a half hour to a hour is no issue. Adobe Lightroom tends to be the bottle neck, but I just go do something else when downloading a lot of photos. For occasional photos, the 5 GHZ radio may be all I need, wight now, with my R, I just download jpeg versions, it takes 3 or 4 seconds for a image. If they downloaded as soon as I took them, that would be great, but so far, I can only download them by restarting the camera and then they all download as its starting up.
Upvote
0
great information and fair enough!
I'm not familiar with CRAW/.CR3 which is likely to be on the R5. The 5DS/R RAW files were about 60Mb in size and if I understand correctly, the CR3 files will replace mRaw and sRAW but they are using a lossy compression algorithm.
Does anyone have experience if the differences between CR3 and CR2 is quality? it looks to be a ~40% file size difference which will add up if shooting 20fps @ 45 Mp
IQ barely takes a hit, although for the most critical work where the file is pushed a lot it might make a difference. Also see https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Cameras/Canon-C-RAW-Image-File-Format.aspx and also https://fstoppers.com/education/sam...-good-canons-new-compressed-raw-format-477335
By the way, don't all raws produced by a more recent Canon camera have the .CR3 extension, no matter if it's a normal raw or a c-raw?
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 381342
Guest
I am suggesting plugging the camera directly into your computer with USB-C. On a Mac you can use Image Capture to pull out the RAW files at as fast as your camera can deliver them. When I first got my Nikon Z6 I did this and it was plenty fast for reading out the card. If you are using a CFE card USB-C from the camera or a reader will not have enough bandwidth but it'll still be quick enough until you get a TB3 reader. WiFi I would only use as I shoot so at the end of the shoot all the images have already trickled into my laptop or iPad.
Upvote
0
Exactly, saying '.CR3' is meaningless in that regard. If you want to point out lossy compression, that's CRAW. Lossless compression is RAW.
Upvote
0
I stopped giving Lightroom the task to transfer the files many years ago. This speeded up the workflow significantly.
It is absolutely no deal to drag and drop all your files from the card into a folder named with the date of the shooting by using MAC Finder/ Windows Explorer which gives you max transfer rates.
This done, you just import the files into Lightroom without data transfer.
-> More speed, no failures/ crashes since a decade, even with 20,000+ files within one import.
Upvote
0
I was without a CFexpress card reader for about 2m with the 1DXIII and basic camera WiFi was a pain to transfer. A card reader is much better. Thankfully I got a USB-C to normal USB wire with it (not with the Sandisk by default). I also bought a Delkin reader (as I was giving up on canon sending the Sandisk). It came with two cables. I’ve nothing currently with thundebolt but I’m sure my next laptop will (I hate cables, I have so many types !!!!). Both readers run quite hot - the Delkin is metallic. The cards are metallic. Not sure it’s good for them to be so warm. It’s all certainly and added cost you have to remember. Ideally you need new expensive memory cards, readers and a thunderbolt laptop/pc to get the best out of the 5R.
Upvote
0
I stopped too. I didn’t understand why Lightroom was so slow at transferring. It’s much quicker to copy over to the machine from the card and then upload into Lightroom. I’ve really almost given up on Lightroom. I take too many photos , the database gets huge and slow and I have create another one so it’s not really useful . Once you clear down files the database is pointing to nothing. I think it was fine in the time where laptop storage was large compared to file size. With the high mp cameras you’d fill a 1TB hard disk in no time which means you have to constantly clear the disk to make room.
Upvote
0
I've never just dumped my cards into Lightroom, you will quickly fill it with useless data that will slow it down. For my workflow I copy all of the images from the shoot to the client's project folder using Windows Explorer, I use FastStone to copy all of the technically correct images (exposure, focus, composition) to a new selections folder, then I use FastStone to batch process the RAWs into JPGs that I send to the customer. Once they make their picks only then do I import their picks into Lightroom.
With that workflow I can send clients proofs from say a wedding with 1500 images in less than an hour, and I only import images in Lightroom that will be processed. I've had Lightroom running for 5yrs on one install before and never needed a new database and it did not slow down from the original install (other than when Adobe screwed it up with patches but that's a different rant for a different day).
As far as Lexar goes, I'm slowly dumping all of their products; I've switched to SanDisk for all of my storage media and I'm not too impressed with their Lexar Workflow professional media hub. It is slow, I frequently have to remove and reinsert media before it is seen by the OS, and their CFast 2.0 module does not work at all, I ended up having to buy an Angelbird CFast reader to read my CFast cards.
In 2017 Lexar was bought out and their products have been circling the drain ever since: https://petapixel.com/2017/09/01/lexar-acquired-chinese-flash-storage-company/
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Similar threads
