dolina said:
To add to dolina's comment: Rob stopped updating his pages back in July 2012. You shouldn't be using his pages as a reference for up-to-date memory card speeds, but pages like http://www.cameramemoryspeed.com/
Upvote
0
The beauty of CF cards.
- Thread starter Ozarker
- Start date
To add to dolina's comment: Rob stopped updating his pages back in July 2012. You shouldn't be using his pages as a reference for up-to-date memory card speeds, but pages like http://www.cameramemoryspeed.com/
With Nikon's D500 they went with XQD + UHS-II SD.pwp said:
I do agree, the SD card is just nuisance. Only reason I would use it is for the eyeFI.
Upvote
0
dolina said:With Nikon's D500 they went with XQD + UHS-II SD.
And Now, there is a certified eye-Fi CF holder that works, so you do not need a SD slot for eye-fi. I have a non certified holder and it works for some cameras, but not my old 5D Classic where I wanted to use it. I find myself using eye-fi in my 5D MK III slot to send jpgs to my pc as I shoot. I go thru those, and only bother with raws for images I want to keep permanently.
Upvote
0
Good to know but too little too late. CF is being phased out and new bodies have built-in WiFi already.Mt Spokane Photography said:
Upvote
0
dolina said:
Wait until you try it. Unless they have made big strides, its a pain compared to eye-fi. Hopefully the 1DX II is a new generation of Wi-Fi.
Upvote
0
Really is quite amazing.
Using a SanDisk Extreme Pro 160mb/s 64GB 65 UDMA 7Card I got the following results each at continuous shooting of 2 mins on a 5D Mark II:
Largest Raw File: 339 Shots
Smallest Raw File: 255 Shots
Smallest JPEG: 182 Shots
The results are counter intuitive to me. I would thin less shots on the larger files than the small files. Very strange. At no point during the test did the buffer fill up. For a guy that like to shoot birds this is great news to me.
I format my card after each shooting session.
Using a SanDisk Extreme Pro 160mb/s 64GB 65 UDMA 7Card I got the following results each at continuous shooting of 2 mins on a 5D Mark II:
Largest Raw File: 339 Shots
Smallest Raw File: 255 Shots
Smallest JPEG: 182 Shots
The results are counter intuitive to me. I would thin less shots on the larger files than the small files. Very strange. At no point during the test did the buffer fill up. For a guy that like to shoot birds this is great news to me.
I format my card after each shooting session.
Upvote
0
Ryan708 said:
I format my cards after every session once the photos are on my computer. Is that what you mean? I'm not sure whether or not that is what I should be doing, but it is what I do. Thanks for asking.
Upvote
0
pwp said:
I think that is exactly what I'll be doing. I don't have any paying clients, but when shotting portraits I can switch to dual cards.
However, when birding or shooting a football game I'll just use the CF card.
The burst speed of the otherwise fantastic 5D III is just too slow to also be waiting on the buffer slowing things down due to the SD card.
I've absolutely loved my 70D, but I am seriously thinking of selling it and my EF 400mm f/5.6L to help finance a 7D mark II. I could use the CF card, 10FPS, and apparently bottomless buffer if I leave the SD card out.
Also, the layout would be very similar to my 5D Mark III. That would be very nice. I'm guessing Ebay would be the best route for that. Surely selling those two items would get me close to having the money for a 7D Mark II. My EX 2 Mark II would cover the 400MM.
What do y'all think? KEH is out of the question.
It is just amazing what leaving that SD card out does for the camera.
Upvote
0
Hi CanonFanBoy.
First the shot count, I believe that would be down to extra processing involved in down sampling the pixel count for the reduced size raw and JPEG.
Re the format, quick format only marks the card as empty, a full format wipes the card clean. (Writes zeros to each address?)
Second, the 7DII doesn't seem to suffer the same with the SD card, not that I have shot 10 fps until it stopped, but bursts plenty enough for a sports shoot don't leave it buffering. Possibly the result of having dual Digic 6 processors.
I would not get rid of the 400 expecting to rely on the 70-200 + 2x, I think you would miss the resolution of the 400 bare and not being able to go to 800 would be my concern, but then I often feel focal length limited, if you rarely get that long you may be ok with it for the odd occasion.
Cheers, Graham.
First the shot count, I believe that would be down to extra processing involved in down sampling the pixel count for the reduced size raw and JPEG.
Re the format, quick format only marks the card as empty, a full format wipes the card clean. (Writes zeros to each address?)
CanonFanBoy said:
Second, the 7DII doesn't seem to suffer the same with the SD card, not that I have shot 10 fps until it stopped, but bursts plenty enough for a sports shoot don't leave it buffering. Possibly the result of having dual Digic 6 processors.
I would not get rid of the 400 expecting to rely on the 70-200 + 2x, I think you would miss the resolution of the 400 bare and not being able to go to 800 would be my concern, but then I often feel focal length limited, if you rarely get that long you may be ok with it for the odd occasion.
Cheers, Graham.
CanonFanBoy said:
Upvote
0
pwp said:
I took your advice and removed the SD card. The buffer is now much deeper and framerate seems faster. Thanks!
Upvote
0
Hi I'm new here and newly back to the Canon fold. I hope I'll be able to contribute to this great forum.
To cut a long story short I have ordered a new 5DS. I am very excited about it but have to figure out what to do with memory cards and wondered if anyone here has any practical experience with those giant files.
I have been with Sony for the last few years so all the modern fast cards I have are SD cards. My compact flash cards are all quite old now and I am sure much slower than my current SD cards.
Can anyone who has shot the 5DS/R give their impressions on the SD vs CF situation for the 50mp files? I have read the test sites that have found that the latest CF cards are getting a write speed of around 90-100 MB/s with the latest SD cards managing about 70. My question is, how do those numbers translate into real world experience? Is it worth going for CF cards? I am an all-round photographer, fast bursts aren't that important to me but I also don't want to make the camera unpleasant to use.
And even within the CF card or SD card camp I note quite different numbers for example between sandisk "extreme" SD cards and "extreme pro" SD cards (and the same with both types of CF cards). The pro ones are a great deal more expensive though so before I start spending serious money I would love to know if anyone here can chip in with their experience. In particular, would using something like an "Extreme" 90MB/s SDXC card be a real problem leaving me wishing I had spent the money on a faster CF card? Or are those differences not very important in the real world?
Also I notice there are some SD cards coming onto the market with MB/s figures far in excess of what CF cards advertise. I understand that the 5DS won't be able to make use of their speed but I have the feeling that such cards might be a better bet for the future as I have no idea how much longer Canon will continue with CF cards - I suppose the 5D IV whenever it comes out will give us the best clue. I can't see SD cards going anywhere for a while though so I feel they might be a better bet... yet reading the forum here many seem much happier with their fast CF cards. It leaves me wondering if it's the sort of situation with USB vs Thunderbolt where USB has high official figures but in practice doesn't work quite that fast and Thunderbolt will be faster for external drives etc - is there some inherent advantage to CF cards that I am missing I wonder?
To cut a long story short I have ordered a new 5DS. I am very excited about it but have to figure out what to do with memory cards and wondered if anyone here has any practical experience with those giant files.
I have been with Sony for the last few years so all the modern fast cards I have are SD cards. My compact flash cards are all quite old now and I am sure much slower than my current SD cards.
Can anyone who has shot the 5DS/R give their impressions on the SD vs CF situation for the 50mp files? I have read the test sites that have found that the latest CF cards are getting a write speed of around 90-100 MB/s with the latest SD cards managing about 70. My question is, how do those numbers translate into real world experience? Is it worth going for CF cards? I am an all-round photographer, fast bursts aren't that important to me but I also don't want to make the camera unpleasant to use.
And even within the CF card or SD card camp I note quite different numbers for example between sandisk "extreme" SD cards and "extreme pro" SD cards (and the same with both types of CF cards). The pro ones are a great deal more expensive though so before I start spending serious money I would love to know if anyone here can chip in with their experience. In particular, would using something like an "Extreme" 90MB/s SDXC card be a real problem leaving me wishing I had spent the money on a faster CF card? Or are those differences not very important in the real world?
Also I notice there are some SD cards coming onto the market with MB/s figures far in excess of what CF cards advertise. I understand that the 5DS won't be able to make use of their speed but I have the feeling that such cards might be a better bet for the future as I have no idea how much longer Canon will continue with CF cards - I suppose the 5D IV whenever it comes out will give us the best clue. I can't see SD cards going anywhere for a while though so I feel they might be a better bet... yet reading the forum here many seem much happier with their fast CF cards. It leaves me wondering if it's the sort of situation with USB vs Thunderbolt where USB has high official figures but in practice doesn't work quite that fast and Thunderbolt will be faster for external drives etc - is there some inherent advantage to CF cards that I am missing I wonder?
Upvote
0
Speed specifications published by the manufacturers of SD cards, refer to the reading speed only. The write speed is usually much slower and sustained continuous recording speed is even slower.mjg79 said:
A typical SD-HC Sandisk Ultra 80MB / s can be read up to 80MB / s, recorded up to 60MB / s, but the guaranteed minimum sustained speed for continuous recording is 10MB / s.
To get closer to the maximum recording speed (available for short periods) 60MB / s do format the card by activating the "low level format".
With a card as described above, you ~ and can do short bursts until the camera's buffer is full, and the frame rate decreases.
Upvote
0
I find cf card write speeds on the 5ds r really slow even with 1066x and 160MB/s cards. I could image how frustrating it will be even with a uhs-i bus SD cards.mjg79 said:
Upvote
0
Thank you dolina and ajfotofilmagem for your replies. I can see this is an area that merits some more study and perhaps expense. I've never owned a camera with a resolution above 24mp before so have never paid that much attention to it.
This was the website I was quoting figures from:
http://www.cameramemoryspeed.com/canon-5ds/sd-cf-card-comparison/
It seems quite comprehensive and might help some others here. I have a 32gb Sandisk Extreme SD card that says 80MB/s but I see how those figures are massaged. But I will give it a try on the 5DS and see if it bothers me and if it's worth spending more on some faster CF cards.
Probably the most confusing to me of the results given by that site was that the Sandisk Extreme CF cards 120MB/s proved slower than the Sandisk Extreme SD 80MB/s card. I had seen some quite good prices on that particular CF card and was considering buying a couple of big capacity ones but - at least according to that site - it isn't as fast as the "equivalent" SD card.
With the Extreme Pro types the CF card is faster than the SD card so I might just bite the bullet and spend some more to get it.
This was the website I was quoting figures from:
http://www.cameramemoryspeed.com/canon-5ds/sd-cf-card-comparison/
It seems quite comprehensive and might help some others here. I have a 32gb Sandisk Extreme SD card that says 80MB/s but I see how those figures are massaged. But I will give it a try on the 5DS and see if it bothers me and if it's worth spending more on some faster CF cards.
Probably the most confusing to me of the results given by that site was that the Sandisk Extreme CF cards 120MB/s proved slower than the Sandisk Extreme SD 80MB/s card. I had seen some quite good prices on that particular CF card and was considering buying a couple of big capacity ones but - at least according to that site - it isn't as fast as the "equivalent" SD card.
With the Extreme Pro types the CF card is faster than the SD card so I might just bite the bullet and spend some more to get it.
Upvote
0
In the past, just like you, I would give much thought and read the whole article.mjg79 said:
Today, when visiting the site I just scroll down to the bottom and just pick whichever card it recommends excluding the KOMPUTERBay.
For CF cards the fastest are those Sandisk 160MB/s and Lexar 1066x. While SD cards the Lexar 2000x are to have. These two brands are the only game in town. All others are too expensive or slow as they do not have the economies of scale to lower the price as much as Sandisk and Lexar.
You are in luck. Sandisk and Lexar lowered their prices this month.
I have whittled down my 10 year spanning twenty-five piece collection to one 128GB 1066x card per body. I had so many cards that most of the time I misplace them. Even found one with photos from 2010. >_<
When prices for 256GB 1066x fall near $100 I will sell all my 128GB 1066x cards for them.
Upvote
0
dolina said:
When prices are that low, CF cards will no longer be all that important. In fact, people may have already started talking about the 1DX Mark III by then.
Plus, if you are using a Canon camera with a CF card in it, then it is unlikely to shoot 4K which means that there is very little reason to have a 256GB card in the camera anyway.
It is hard to fill 64GB on a normal day and even harder to fill 128GB in a day even when shooting an all day-sports event.
I delete all pictures from my cards daily. I use 2x 64GB 1066X (Lexar) and have no need for 128GB, and definitely not 256GB and I shoot video too. That will only change when I start to shoot 4K video.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
