Kinston vs Transcend vs Sandisk

[yabbie]

My fantastically cheap source for 120x transcend cards just dried up, so now I'm shopping for a decently priced fast-ish card that is reliable and durable.

I've currently had 80x (a bit slow) and 120x Transcend cards, and have had absolutely no problems with these. I'm a bit wary of the new 133x Transcend cards, as these look to be a bit cheaper, and not up to the same standard as the 120x which is now out of production, being replaced by the new 266x cards.
Does anyone have experience with the new 266x Transcend cards?

What are people's experiences with Kingston cards, any problems?

I know Sandisk are good, but their prices are a bit exhorbitant compared to their competition. How slow are the Extreme II cards?

I won't exactly be able to shoot 6 fps with my current kit, but my older 80x Transcend cards have issues with 3 fps after not too many shots. The 120x are fine.

Recommendations? Or good places to get cheap cards?

[jr_senator]

I have several Kingston cards, no problems here.

[mrerico]

Sandisk all the way

[logo20heli]

I use a Transcend 4GB 266x card in my 5D. I've taken 1000s of shots and it worked reliably through my trip to Italy and Croatia last year. Speed is really great too when downloading to the computer if you have a UDMA reader. Check out the read/write speed of the 8GB version here (http://www.hjreggel.net/cardspeed/index.html#cs_TS8GCF266.html). For a USB 2.0 UDMA reader, I use and like the this (http://www.mydigitaldiscount.com/SPD/omniflash-usb-2-0-udma-40-compact-flash-reader-omniflash-usb-2-0-udma-40-compact-flash-reader-writer--80000264-1186149598.jsp). It's best to leave it with the factory formatted of FAT32 with 32KB clusters to retain the best read/write performance. Instead of formatting in camera, I just delete all photos in camera. Formatting in the 5D creates smaller clusters.

[Double Negative]

Head over to Rob Galbraith and check out the CF/SD Database (http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007) for all your questions - and answers.

[Mystwalker]

Not using price to decide, I prefer ...
Sandisk Extreme III, or Ultra II which are cheaper
Kingston
Transcend

If price is a factor ... Ultra II or Kingston. Do not quite trust Transcend.

[Jimmer411]

My main card is an 8gb Transcend 133x card and its been going fine for 6 months or so. Works just as well as My sandisk Ultra II and my Ridata 266x cards.

[yabbie]

Not using price to decide, I prefer ...
Sandisk Extreme III, or Ultra II which are cheaper
Kingston
Transcend

If price is a factor ... Ultra II or Kingston. Do not quite trust Transcend.

I'm the opposite, don't quite trust Kingston because I've never used that brand. Transcend however I have tried and tested, so would have no problems with buying their higher quality cards.

[Ade H]

...don't quite trust Kingston because I've never used that brand.

Based on that logic, I could say that "I've never used an Olympus, so I don't trust them to be reliable."

I prefer empirical data and solid evidence, so if there is any published data that reasonably proves that Kingston cards are any less reliable than all its other memory products, both stable and volatile, then I could well be persuaded to stop using them right now and revert solely to Sandisk. Until that happens, I will be happy to continue with them.

[eelnoraa]

I have used Transcend(133x 4G), Kingston(Elite 4G), Sandisk(EIII 8G), Lexar(133xPro 8G), PQI(120x 2G), AData(unknow speed 4G). The only one ever gived me corrupted data is Lexar 133xPro, multiple times even after warranty replacement. All others are very good and reliable. And honestly, I have never notice the speed differences during shooting. I used them on 30D, 40D, XT, 5D but I hardly do burst tho. Sandisk and Lexar is slight faster when downloading image with card reader. So my conclusion is brand name isn't necessary better, non brand name can be just as good. And most important, no more Lexar for me.

eel

[lowcrust]

You get what you pay for. Simple as that. I prefer speed over capacity myself.

[crn3371]

I've had good luck with the Ritek (Ridata) cards from Newegg.

[Jakpro]

I use Kingston, Transcend, and Sandisk and they all work fine.

Kingston has been a valued manufacturer of memory products for a long, long, time. I have used their computer memory, USB drives and cards with no problems.

[cdifoto]

You get what you pay for.
Sometimes less. ;)

I use Sandisk, Transcend, RiData, and Kingston. No problems. I even have a PNY SDHC because I traded a 2GB Sandisk SD to my bro in law for it (his P&S wouldn't take an SDHC). The only cards I won't use are the ones with no name on them...ie you don't know where it came from.

[dave kadolph]

We had a pair of these Kingstons (http://www.normancamera.com/product-exec/product_id/13022/nm/Kingston_2GB_Compact_Flash_Memory_Card)go bad right out of the package--both from the same lot number.

They were replaced no problem and they have been trouble free since.

[Stinger]

I would put the quality of Kingston a little ahead Sandisk, although both are great

[Jon]

I've had problems with a couple of Kingstons out of a very small sample (maybe 5), but only one SanDisk (out of maybe 20-30) which they replaced. I don't buy anything but SanDisk and nothing slower than Extreme III.

[jr_senator]

Funny thing to me is that while it appears SanDisc is the favorite of so many members, it is the only flash drive I have had failed. I guess one can have a problem with one brand almost as often as with another.

[cdifoto]

Those of you who have had a failure of a card, I was wondering if you'd be willing to define that failure. What exactly happened/did not happen? I don't want you to tell me what a failure is and could be...I want you to tell me what YOUR failure was...also what brand card too. Thanks. :)

[Jon]

Lost images. Erratic on the Kingston, which made it especially aggravating. A definable location on the card (repeatedly spotted by writing to it on a computer) was bad with the Ultra II. Images could be recovered from both, but I won't use a card that behaves erratically.

[dave kadolph]

The LCD displayed an error code--CF Error or something similar.

[yabbie]

I know at least Transcend has different quality cards, for example the 120x was more expensive, and meant to be more durable than the 133x card, and according to Transcend, their 266x is taking the discontinued 120x's place. You can choose fast or durable, or both, and pay for it too. So it doesn't really make sense to say that all Transcend cards are not reliable, if you had a 133x die. You pay for what you get.

I don't know if Kingston and the other brands are the same with having these different options?