Canon SD300: High Speed Card Not Necessary?

[information]

I attended the MacWorld Expo this week and dropped by the Canon exhibit to ask if the SanDisk regular SD Card was enough for video clips, or if it was really necessary to get the SanDisk high performance card. The first Canon rep told me that the SD300 had a new processor which was quite fast and that the regular SanDisk cards were good enough for it all all resolutions. I asked if he was sure and he said: "If it is a SanDisk card, the regular card will do fine, that is what I have." Later in the day another attendant at the Canon booth confirmed this saying: "It's (the SandDisk high performance card) overkill for this particular camera." They both sounded quite authoritative to me, but I have seen the high speed cards recommended for the SD300. Before I stock up on the 1Gig regular cards, does anyone have any additional comments on this point?

Thanks for any input.

[Johnno]

I recently purchased a sd300 (IXUS 40) with a standard 512 SanDisk card & have had no probs with movies or sontinues pics at all on any settings

[Jethro790]

I had quite the opposite results with my SD200. I couldn't take long movies at big resolution and the continuous shooting mode didn't work. The problems went away when I got a SanDisk 512 Ultra II card.

[information]

I had quite the opposite results with my SD200. I couldn't take long movies at big resolution and the continuous shooting mode didn't work. The problems went away when I got a SanDisk 512 Ultra II card.
Does the SD200 have the same processor as the SD300?

[Spiegs1106]

nope sry :oops:

[information]

Well I'm not sure but this clip from a Septermber 21, 2004 Businesswire press release seems to indicate that the processors in fact are the same:

"The new PowerShot SD200 and SD300 Digital ELPHs are the first in the PowerShot line of digital cameras to utilize DIGIC II Technology. Canon's DIGIC II image processor is without question, the most powerful imaging processor that the company has ever put into a digital camera. It boasts improved color reproduction of high-saturation, bright subjects, improved auto white balance precision, and wider dynamic range in highlight areas. In addition to its image quality improvements, the DIGIC II chip is also responsible for speeding up camera performance in areas such as start-up time, autofocus calculation, card-writing speed, continuous shooting and movie recording."

[fdelement]

i just got my sandisk extreme III 1GB for my sd300. It is a bit overkill for the camera, but with that much storage, I wanted it to transfer fast onto my computer :)

[information]

i just got my sandisk extreme III 1GB for my sd300. It is a bit overkill for the camera, but with that much storage, I wanted it to transfer fast onto my computer :)
I didn't know that the extreme card wrote faster to the hard drive. It is a consideration that I had not considered :-).

[lafester]

i have a kingston regular speed card that really is not fast enough for rapid shooting or 60 fps video mode. my lexar 1gb 32x card works great though.

anything faster will only increase download speed which does become a factor with 1gb downloads.

chris

[fdelement]

yea.. the sandisk extreme III series has a transfer rate of 20MB/sec (133x), the ultra2's get like 9MB/Sec (60x). All the standard memory is like <10x. So before you buy the card, you should definitely look at how fast the transfer rate is

[information]

yea.. the sandisk extreme III series has a transfer rate of 20MB/sec (133x), the ultra2's get like 9MB/Sec (60x). All the standard memory is like <10x. So before you buy the card, you should definitely look at how fast the transfer rate is
Thanks fdelement!

[Jon]

yea.. the sandisk extreme III series has a transfer rate of 20MB/sec (133x), the ultra2's get like 9MB/Sec (60x). All the standard memory is like <10x. So before you buy the card, you should definitely look at how fast the transfer rate is

Rob Galbraith's database (http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007) shows the Extreme III in a card-computer transfer at about 13 MB/sec. The Ultra II came through at 11 MB/Sec. A SanDisk standard card was clocked at about 2.4 MB/Sec.

[Avalonthas]

Well the high speed CF cards will make a different in camera speed, but not that much. You wont see a big jump in speed until you get into higher end cameras especially Digital SLR's. However if you need a CF card with high capacity they usually come with 40x or 80x anyways once u get into 1gig and higher so u might as well take the extra speed for future cameras.

Also if ur transfering pics to ur computer a high speed CF card will help, but it also depends on ur card reader. Since the transfer can only go as fast as your USB connection, a higher card wont do anything if your card reader or camera only supports USB 1.1. You will notice a different in USB 2.0, as i do not think CF card speed has surpassed USB 2.0 yet? Dont quote me on that hehe

[foobar]

We're talking about SD here, not CF. Yes, the processors in the SD200 and SD300 are the same.

You can get away with a 'normal' SD card for most things with these cameras - but if you record movies at the highest resolution and frame rate, after a few minutes the card will not be able to keep up. So a normal card is fine if you don't want to record long movies.

But considering the pricing these days, you may as well get a high-speed card. You'll be able to record lenthy movies without incident, and if you have a decent card reader it will be very fast in copying files.

[theone33]

I had quite the opposite results with my SD200. I couldn't take long movies at big resolution and the continuous shooting mode didn't work. The problems went away when I got a SanDisk 512 Ultra II card.:evil:


not true at all he did not have his camera set right to shoot continuous shots ... and you don't need a faster card in the new sd200 or 300 ..they are fast on their own..:razz: :razz: >:( :roll:

[theone33]

Well I'm not sure but this clip from a Septermber 21, 2004 Businesswire press release seems to indicate that the processors in fact are the same:

"The new PowerShot SD200 and SD300 Digital ELPHs are the first in the PowerShot line of digital cameras to utilize DIGIC II Technology. Canon's DIGIC II image processor is without question, the most powerful imaging processor that the company has ever put into a digital camera. It boasts improved color reproduction of high-saturation, bright subjects, improved auto white balance precision, and wider dynamic range in highlight areas. In addition to its image quality improvements, the DIGIC II chip is also responsible for speeding up camera performance in areas such as start-up time, autofocus calculation, card-writing speed, continuous shooting and movie recording."

thats what am trying to say......:wink: this is somebody who knows....:cool:

[foobar]

:evil:
and you don't need a faster card in the new sd200 or 300 ..they are fast on their own..

Well I know that when the cameras first came out, people were walking into K-Mart and asking for an SD card, then complaining that the camera wouldn't let them record a movie to the capacity of the card.

At the time, people said that normal speed, non-Sandisk cards could not keep up. Also, even if you did buy a normal speed Sandisk card, you had to check what revision it was - the newer 'normal' cards could keep up, but apparently the older 'normal' cards could not.

If you go any buy some generic SD card now, they probably can keep up with the camera.

I still think it's worth getting a faster speed card, though. They don't cost much more than normal speed cards, and can be faster in transferring files (when using the right card reader). Plus it's a kind of future-proofing, I guess, as newer cameras stream more and more data for saving.

[bzikofski]

i have ixus 40 (sd300) and an Apacer High Speed 1GB card.
works excellent, it's really fast, i've had no problems at all...

and it's cheaper than Sandisk..
cheers!

[davidfig]

Rob Galbraith's database (http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007) shows the Extreme III in a card-computer transfer at about 13 MB/sec. The Ultra II came through at 11 MB/Sec. A SanDisk standard card was clocked at about 2.4 MB/Sec.

If I remember right from steves-digicams.com, the SD300 at full resolution video with 30fps is a little over 2MB/sec. So the standard card is barely enough. I chose the Transcend 45x. It was the same price as the SanDisk and 4 times the speed. I have never lost a shot or movie.

[Jon]

If 2 MB/s is the max. write speed from camera to card, a standard SanDisk, capable of supporting 2.4 MB/s, is enough. The faster cards will have more legs for when you get a newer, faster camera though.

[Miyamoto Musashi]

What about connecting to the computer with the supplied usb cable? Do the SD's support USB 2.0 themselves, or do you need a 2.0 card reader for the higher transfer rates?

[foobar]

The camera only supports USB 1.1. So when transferring directly from the camera, you are limited to USB 1.1 speeds.

If you get a USB 2.0 card reader, and you have USB 2.0 ports on your computer, then you can get USB 2.0 speeds when reading from the SD card. (SD card specifications usually mention the maximum read speed).

[Ronald S. Jr.]

I had an SD300 before I got into slr, and my 1 gig lexar regular sd went like lightning. 1 minute 60 fps clips only lagged a second or so after pressing shutter release. Got mine for 70 bucks or so on ebay. extreme II or III cards are absolutely overkill for any digital elph. they cost as much as the camera often times. Nonsense.