Shooting in a Gym setting

[BarbaraC Profile Private messageWebsite]

I suspect, then, that unless the super-fast card is at the same price as the slower ones, there will be no point for me. I do happen to favor two specific cards I own which are faster than the others. The only time I really care about this is when shooting wildlife due to losing shots because the camera's buffer is full. Inevitably, it's the great shot that can't be taken. It's related to the constant of seeing the mother of all shots only when your camera is sitting back home on the table in the hallway.

Barbara

[gpsmikey Profile Private message]

One other thing to keep in mind, although I don't think it is as much of an issue
any more, is the fact that some cards worked better (or worse) with some
cameras. Several years ago, there were a number of cameras that would only
work with specific cards (the Nikon site used to have a list of which cards they
had tested with their cameras - others did the same). I *think* they have
finally got the standards worked so they play together nicely ..... but based on
my recent experiences with microchipping my dog, I have my doubts (there
are basically 4 different chips and not all readers will read all chips - it is not
a techinical issue, it is a political game $$$ ).

mikey

[BarbaraC Profile Private messageWebsite]

The only true problem I've had with cards has been with a specific brand--SimpleTech--and I don't even know if they still make cards. The one I had was a total lemon, and who knows? It could have been just that single one-in-a-million card, but I got burned once and that was enough. These days, I'm pretty much a Lexar/SanDisk kind of person. Neither brand has ever failed me. (Shouldn't have said that. Stupid thing to say. Should I delete it? Will it even matter once I've typed it? The fates know about it. All is lost.)

Barbara

[Tarafrost Profile Private messageWebsite]

Andrzej, I haven't gotten cards in a while, and I've been wondering about these newest ones. Is the difference in speed very obvious? Also--and this question comes from a lack of knowledge--wouldn't the card's speed be affected by the camera's own processing speed? I'm asking this because mine is an older dSLR that is probably pokier than a newer model.

The answer to this is: it depends!

Notice that I don't use the latest/greatest Extreme IV's....I use the Extreme III's. That is partly my own price vs. performance analysis. And the fact that my D200 can't really use the speed of the IV's, and transfer speed to the computer isn't a bottleneck for me (yet).

The latest IV's from SanDisk tend to improve the transfer to computer speed (if you have the right CF card reader) and not so much camera write to card speeds. Note, I never use my camera to transfer to my computer....that tends to be slower and more cumbersome. I pull the CF cards and use a dedicated reader that I know is using USB 2.0 (some older DSLR's only support USB 1.1 with is 10x slower!).

More recent DSLR's have bigger and faster image buffers built in, so that the write to card speed becomes less important. My D200 will do somewhere near 20 shots at 5/second before it fills the in-camera buffer and then slows down waiting for the images to write to the card. Unless you are shooting the NFL for a living, most of us never rip of a burst that will fill the buffer, so things tend to always work out. But my older D100 has a much slower/smaller buffer and I have hit the dreaded buffer full slowdown many times when doing "motor drive" type shots. So again, it depends.

If your camera is fast enough for the type of photography that you currently do, then it's not a big deal. If it isn't then you need to research what your body is capable of and then you'll be able to decide what makes most sense...faster cards, dedicated/faster USB reader, or maybe even an new DSLR body.

About brand names, I stick to SanDisk. I've heard people having problems with the cheaper knock-offs and would rather spend a few more pennies to get reliability. When I get that award winning wildlife shot, or perfect vacation shot, I don't want to lose it because I tried to save a few dollars on a memory card.

But YMMV, as always.

[BarbaraC Profile Private messageWebsite]

It would appear, then, that there's currently no sense in my investing in faster cards. My Olympus E-20 is several generations back, and it isn't known for its speed in saving to disk. It has a burst mode, but I can't abide taking JPEGs, which are required in it. I've tried it, and three pics seems to be its limit. One of these days when money doesn't seem to be constantly funneled elsewhere, I'm going to go for the biggest-bestest Nikon or Canon I can afford, not so much for the pixel count as for speed and low-light ability, both of which my Olympus lacks.

I agree with you on not downloading from the camera even though I've actually never done it. It simply doesn't make sense.

I've had various brand cards fail on me except for Lexar and SanDisk, and I prefer the latter without being to tell you why--some difference so small that it must be subliminal.

Barbara