Advice on CF Card/ 40D

[Angry Dad]

I am upgrading to a 40D and I am going to buy a backup cf card.

I currently have a Sandisk Extreme3 4 gig, which is great., but I know very little about the cf speeds.

Do I use my current Extreme 3 in the 40D, and another Extreme 3 for backup?
Or Can I use something less expensive for my backup?

Im slightly worried about reliability if I buy other than Sandisk, and I want to make sure Im not slowing down the camera with an inferior product.

[bhanu2217]

San disk Extreme 3 thing is good enough. The speed is around 133X i think.
I have been using Extreme 3 4 GB and i find it really good.
If u got more money than go for Extreme 4.

[John_B]

Angry Dad,
You can use other speeds CF cards but I suggest you stick with SanDisk ;)

[Angry Dad]

Angry Dad,
You can use other speeds CF cards but I suggest you stick with SanDisk ;)
I have no problem at all with my Sandisk, but is there a specific reason to not try another brand? Seems to me Sandisk has the market cornered because I havnt heard any other reccomendations.

[John_B]

Angry Dad,
I personally have heard and read about more problems with other disks so I stick to SanDisk after over 6+ years of using them and never a problem why try another to save a dollar? ??? and maybe loose some photos? ???

SanDisk has earned there reputation with me :)

[wallybud]

I dont think its worth it on the 40D to upgrade to the extreme IV...I believe i read somewhere that the camera cant process at that speed anyway or something like that lol...i say but whatever, and not sure what you shoot but never heard of a card being referred to as backup hehe..I have an 8gb and a 2...if i shoot through the 8 which is like 500 something. which i never do in one day than i have a 2 (both extreme III) (I bought the 2 first with my camera, then upgraded to 8 so i could go all day)

[Mark1]

The speed only really comes into play when you are down loading thru a card reader. The camera it self is the bottle neck not the card, when you are captureing images. But when you unload them to your computer, thats when the top speed comes into play. I heard an interview with the Big Dog at a Hoodman and even he says the same. Hoodman markets 300X cards.

[wallybud]

yes i understand that good point, however the d/l speed makes no difference to me, what i understand is that(correct me if im wrong) but the write speed in which the camera burst can dump onto the card is limited by the buffer. and i believe the extreme IV allows fast "dumping" however only the markIII bodies and such can make full use of this so you mid as well get the III for a 40D? can someone please clear this all up hahah

[Mark1]

True it allows fast dumping. But the camera will never max the card out. So the extra speed is a waste IMO. I use Kingston Elite Pro they are a 133X card. I have never had to wait on the card. What you have to wait on is the camera. If you will.... the hose going onto the tank (buffer) is a lot bigger than the one going out. Even if the hose dumps on to the lawn. ( fast card) and can take the water ( images) as fast as you can put it out. You still have to wait on the lil hose.

I guess Im saying, don't get caught up in the speed ratings. They are perfect for marketing, but after a point that is all they are. Your quality 133x or 200X cards are all you really need. They will be able to keep ahead of the camera.

[wallybud]

Haha yeah. nice hose analogy! My question is tho that the mark III would be better off with the IV than the III and why?

[Jon]

Rob Galbraith's CF Database (http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/camera_multi_page.asp?cid=6007-9257&sort_col=card&sort_dir=ASC) shows the 40D is about 10-12% faster in writing to Extreme IV 4 GB cards than Extreme III cards. This means that your buffer won't fill up as fast (since data's being written from buffer to card even as it's being written from sensor to buffer) and it will recover faster when you do fill it. You may not be able to take full advantage of the card's speed in-camera, but you do get some benefit.

[Mark1]

Seems to me Sandisk has the market cornered because I havnt heard any other reccomendations.

Sandisk is kind of like Xerox. the name has become a verb. They became that way because they are very good ( again like Xerox) But there are other brands. I am a Kingston user my self. But I do have 1 PQI that I got at Fry's on sale.

Hoodman makes top shelf cards, but the price is also top shelf!
Lexar are OK i guess.... never used one.

[wallybud]

NICE JON...Now it says that the III 8gb can write to the card at 9.959 ok ok the IV 4gb is writing at 10.639 AND THE DUCATI 8GB writes RAW at 11.015! the gb card size also depends on the write speed which i was unaware of?!?!

[Mark1]

Haha yeah. nice hose analogy! My question is tho that the mark III would be better off with the IV than the III and why?

In real world shooting there will be no difference. NONE. Unless you fill the buffer as mentioned. I don't beleave I have ever filled the buffer. So the question is How often do YOU fill the buffer, and have to wait for it to empty?
If you never do, there is no point to the faster card.

[Mark1]

Not the gig size. but the protocol that runs the card. DIferent versions have different protocols.

[wallybud]

oh ok protocol huh ill have to remember that ; )....also, you never fill your buffer? that wait never is really that long not long enough where i get annoyed by its still a wait haha, and non of this is going to make me switch or buy a diff card its just in the name of science;):lol:;)

[Mark1]

quick read.... http://dpnow.com/4445.html

[Jon]

In real world shooting there will be no difference. NONE. Unless you fill the buffer as mentioned. I don't beleave I have ever filled the buffer. So the question is How often do YOU fill the buffer, and have to wait for it to empty?
If you never do, there is no point to the faster card.
Shoot RAW and you've got a much smaller capacity (in frames) buffer than you get shooting JPEG only. I've been known to fill the buffer in my older cameras even when I wasn't in Continuous shooting mode. And if a faster card delays that condition by 1-2 frames, I'll be happy to go with the faster card. Then too, the Extreme IIIs "everyone" said were too fast to be worth the extra cost for use in my 5D are seeing service in my 1D 3. I didn't have to go out and buy all new cards to keep from throttling my new camera.

[Mark1]

UDMA is the latest protocol. But no camera uses it yet i beleave. But Canon has said they will use it, so faster times are on its way.

What do you shoot that you fill the buffer so often?

Is there anything other than RAW?

[Jon]

quick read.... http://dpnow.com/4445.htmlGo over and look at Rob Galbraith's CF Database (http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007). He's been testing a variety of cards in a variety of cameras for years, and his work is greatly respected. That link you posted is a quick and dirty test designed to grab headlines; take a look at a quantified test like his, and read how he does it.

[wallybud]

nice I look forward to it, will it be just a firmware upgrade? well my BIF skills arent tuned to just a few quick bursts so i pan with the bird in AF on Al Servo and hold the machinegun button ;) this allows for a better in focus sucess rate, id say mostly du to the fact that my current reach is only 320mm... so it must be tack tack sharp in order to crop nicely...the 400 is on its way =)

[Jon]

UDMA is the latest protocol. But no camera uses it yet i beleave. But Canon has said they will use it, so faster times are on its way.

What do you shoot that you fill the buffer so often?

Is there anything other than RAW?Air shows, performances, anything where you're recording a sequence rather than just a single instant, or where you need to catch a lot of action. I've filled the buffer on a 20D shooting at about 5-6 second intervals to an Ultra II during a 12 min. dance performance. I've also filled my buffer at 2 frames/sec while trying to catch a good scenic while crossing a bridge over the Rio Grande Gorge where stopping was prohibited. Steeplechase is another good example, when the field's not too bunched up and/or you're positioned near multiple jumps.

You won't see UDMA retroactively enabled in any Canons.

[Mark1]

I have been trying to look up what the bandwidth is from the buffer to the card. Its not listed anyware.

Wow if you fill it that much it will be a help. I dont shoot anything like that stuff. I shoot on continuous at times, but never have had to fill the buffer. I dont think I have even tried to fill it on purpose.

[wallybud]

yeah it all depends on what you shoot and your habits..i doubt ill be filling it on the 400 prime...highly doubt

[Angry Dad]

So help me out,
Theoretically, if my card is almost full and I want to continuous shoot, that would be a time when the the buffer may be empty (thus my burst rate slower).

[Mark1]

No. The buffer, is a temp holding area in the camera. Images sit there waiting there turn to go to the card. You can take them faster than the camera can write to the card. The available space on the card has nothing to do with the speed. The burst rate should not change. Images so thru the buffer even if you take only 1 picture. It is just part of the system between the sensor and the card. sensor->processor->buffer->card.