Sandisk's new Ultra II ain't what it used to be

[pcasciola]

EDIT: Man, do I feel stupid!!! I misread Galbraith's list, and started this whole thread thinking the "new" Ultra 1Gb on his performance list was actually the new Ultra II MLC line that came out about a month or two ago. I've been waiting for him to review it because he was speculating it was going to be slower than the older card.

Here's the article about the newer Sandisk Ultra II MLC type cards that was released back in September:

New Ultra II Line (http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-6461-7367)

As far as I can tell, it looks like he still has not officially reviewed the new Ultra II MLC 1Gb cards.


----END OF EDIT, BACK TO MY ORIGINAL STUPIDITY----

Well, Rob Galbraith warned us that the revamped Sandisk Ultra II (using cheaper MLC memory) would probably be slower than last years model, and he was right. His tests show that the newer 1Gb Ultra II is 25-40% slower than the previous model, which in RAW mode was 5.6MB/sec on the 20D, and 7.2MB/sec on the 1D Mk II. The newer one is down to around 4.5MB/sec on both cameras, which is very disappointing.

Looks like the $20 upgrade to the 1Gb Extreme III (based on B&H prices) might be well worth it now, especially for the 1D Mk II owners.

So, the bottom line is, ignore all the old positive reviews of the Sandisk 1Gb Ultra II, because Sandisk has pulled a bait and switch on us. Still a decent card, but not a front runner anymore. They should have renamed the line if they were going to pull this.

Here's the current CF speeds on the 20D:
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007-7303

And the 1D Mk II:
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007-6896

[scottbergerphoto]

Thanks. I was afraid that might happen and bought two 2GB cards of the old Ultra II's just before those were released.
Scott

[Pekka]

Good to know. Thanks for posting.

[CoolToolGuy]

Does anyone know whether the two versions of the Ultra II can be identified by any means other than reading the edge stamp (and getting out your secret decoder ring :rolleyes: ). The intro to Rob Galbraith's CF database suggests that the edge stamp is the way to tell, but that info seems to be several months old, prior to him having hands-on.

It would be nice to know, although I'll probably stick with Extreme III.

It looks like Sandisk has made the Extreme III and the Ultra II two separate tiers of performance where before they were very close to each other.

Have Fun,

[I Simonius]

Are the crucial 1GB cards OK?

any opinions /experience appreciated

[michael.luczkow]

thank god i got my two 1GB ultra two's a while ago :-)

[Fills]

Does anyone know whether the two versions of the Ultra II can be identified by any means other than reading the edge stamp (and getting out your secret decoder ring :rolleyes: ). The intro to Rob Galbraith's CF database suggests that the edge stamp is the way to tell, but that info seems to be several months old, prior to him having hands-on.

Have Fun,

I'd be interested as well... I recently bought one (about 5-6 weeks ago) should I be ok?

[pcasciola]

I don't know of any other way to identify the new one yet aside from the edge stamp. The only thing I've noticed is that the packaging on the new one seems way larger than the old one.

Here are the 1Gb Ultra II edge stamps (Again, from Rob Galbraith's site):

Old (Faster) 1Gb Edge stamp: BB0306VZ CHINA
New (Slower) 1Gb Edge stamp: BB0303TV CHINA

[Fills]

Thanks. Mine is a BB04101HA so I guess I need some sort of code cracker!:D.... or I can just use it and figure out the speed myself.

[pcasciola]

I wouldn't worry about it too much. Either way it's still one of the better performing cards, just not near the top like the old one was. It's really only an issue if you shoot RAW and frequently fill the buffer and end up missing a shot waiting for the buffer to clear. It doesn't happen to me often, but when it does happen to me, it's usually during some spectacular sports play where I am trying to crank of a lot of shots, and that little bit of extra speed could give me those one or two more shots I need for the keeper.

[robertwgross]

... the revamped Sandisk Ultra II (using cheaper MLC memory) would probably be slower than last years model, ...

I could be wrong, but I think this MLC techology stores multiple bits to one memory cell. Then the conversion back and forth takes longer, but it allows a higher density on the silicon. It sounds like the marketing guys are pushing hard, and the technology guys are peddling faster to keep up.

---Bob Gross---

[pcasciola]

Yes, you are 100% correct. They revamped the line so they could come out with 4GB and 8GB Ultra II cards, but at the expense of performance.

[Citizensmith]

I guess if you want performance go for a an extreme card. If you want to save some money go for the way cheaper regular cards. Pity though, I was going to pick up another Ultra2 shortly.

[wintermute76]

Figures, I just ordered a 1 GB Ultra II today http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_confused.gif

[CyberDyneSystems]

I was allways surprised that the UltraII were as fast as the Extreme ... it seems that marketing and cost has caught up and they can now reserve there top speed for the pricies cards. Makes sense really,. but still sucks for us.

I've not felt the need to shell out for the Exteme in the past for just this reason,.

And now? If and when I need another 2 or 4 GB CF,. I may end up shelling out for the extreme, or another brand thats as fast ;)

[tommykjensen]

I will probably buy one or 2 cards more before my trip to Florida and I consdered the Sandisk Ultra II but now I think I will go for Kingston Elite Pro which cost 50% less.

[Ballen Photo]

Thanks for the Heads Up Phil.
-Bruce

[tommykjensen]

Was just checking prices on CF cards and was almost shocked when I saw the price difference between SanDisk Ultra II 2GB and SanDisk Extreme 2 GB.

Only $6 more for the Extreme edition!

[Andy_T]

Only $6 more for the Extreme edition!

Exactly my thoughts.

No offence intended, but now we know about the difference, let's all just get the 'extreme' version and stop bitching.

Best regards,
Andy

[I Simonius]

I'll take that as a NO then?
:-)

[sGu]

All my CF cards are Sandisk(6), all of them are Ultra II(10GB in total), and all of them aren't new :D

Looks like next time I get more storage, it'll have to Extreme range ;)

[omr]

Here are the 1Gb Ultra II edge stamps (Again, from Rob Galbraith's site):

Old (Faster) 1Gb Edge stamp: BB0306VZ CHINA
New (Slower) 1Gb Edge stamp: BB0303TV CHINA
Both of those edge stamps were used in tests back in 2003!

Just for example, see the D1X tests, or the older Kodak 14n tests.
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007-6019
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007-6112
In both of those tests, you will find the edge stamps you mentioned, both dated from 2003:
______________________________________________

Brand and Model .......................... Date Added or Updated

Sandisk Ultra II 1GB
(Edge stamp: BB0306VZ CHINA) .... 2003/8/28

Sandisk "new" Ultra 1GB
(Edge stamp: BB0303TV CHINA) .... 2003/7/14 :shock:
______________________________________________


So, that so-called "'New' Ultra" refers to an old Ultra, not the latest MLC Ultra II. Right?

-- omr

[pcasciola]

Uh oh... I think I may have jumped the gun and misread Galbraith's list. :o :o :o :o :o

Looking back at the list now, I think omr is right. I've been waiting for Galbraith to review these cards because he put out a news article saying the revamped Ultra II line is going back to MLC memory like the older, slower cards, so as soon as I saw Sandisk "new" Ultra 1Gb, I didn't notice it wasn't the Ultra II.

This is what I read in the Rob Galbraith news article talking about the new MLC Ultra II's that came out earlier this year:

the company will convert Ultra II to use multi level cell (MLC) flash memory while also adding higher capacities to the CompactFlash, SD and Memory Stick Pro lines.

In the past, MLC has been an acronym for s-l-o-w. MLC-based flash memory cards are less expensive to build than ones that use binary-based flash memory (often referred to as SLC), which has meant that high performance and MLC were not to be found in the same sentence.He goes on to say that Sandisk claims it will not be any slower in the camera, because the cameras cannot take full advantage of the speed anyway.

Here's the full article: http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-6459-7253

Sorry, everyone, looks like I goofed big time on this one. Let's hope the assumptions in the news article are wrong about MLCs always being slower than the SLC cards. I guess we'll still have to wait and see if the new Ultra II ends up being the same as the old Ultra MLCs or not.

I'm going to go back up and edit the original post so no one else is mislead.

[flyfishnj]

doooh