Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Accessories 
Thread started 22 Jan 2011 (Saturday) 17:52
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Transcend vs Sandisk CF Card Reliability

 
MCAsan
Goldmember
Avatar
3,836 posts
Likes: 68
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Atlanta
     
Jan 24, 2011 13:22 as a reply to  @ post 11704023 |  #31

I did find a card that small. But the boxes with 900 and 955 had 10 years of old cards dumped. So indeed it may have been the 2MB ones that were the standard for those two bodies. I even had a pack of filters for those two bodies. Those filters were around 1" wide. Talk about a small CPL

I can remember when the 955 was the neatest thing since sliced bread. Then again I can remember using my parent's Brownie box camera as a kid. Funny that the Brownie is on the shelf in the living room, while the Nikons are with the grand nieces.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
shutterbug ­ guy
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
205 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Thailand
     
Jan 24, 2011 15:26 |  #32

pcj wrote in post #11703610 (external link)
I've been shooting with various Sandisks since buying my first DSLR - shooting with 8gb II's and III's right now.

Wifey just surprise ordered me a 32gb Transcend 600x after getting fed up of me moaning about full cards - so it's nice to see this thread and good reviews - as I'm anal and would have spent weeks or months researching before switching brand, and she just bought on price :)

That would be a nice surprise indeed. I'm not totally convinced yet but right now I'm looking hard at the Transcend 32gb 400x. That extra speed you're getting is tempting though...

Regards,

Roger




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Evan ­ Idler
Goldmember
Avatar
1,600 posts
Likes: 4
Joined May 2005
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
     
Jan 24, 2011 21:30 |  #33

shutterbug guy wrote in post #11706069 (external link)
That would be a nice surprise indeed. I'm not totally convinced yet but right now I'm looking hard at the Transcend 32gb 400x. That extra speed you're getting is tempting though...

Regards,

Roger

If you buy one, and try it for a few weeks, and don't like it you can
always find someone else to buy it for probably close to what you paid
for it. Give or take a few dollars. It's not like were talking $799.95 to
try it.

Sometimes you just have to go for it!!

--Evan


Canon5DIII + Some L + Some non L + Some Sigma + Some Tamron + other stuff....
Patiently awaiting a winning Lottery Ticket to afford all the toys I would really like :-P

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
antitera
Member
Avatar
119 posts
Joined Nov 2008
     
Jan 24, 2011 21:36 |  #34

Here's my 2 pennies, of information. I speak, Transcend. Can thinK? Yes. Hard to, though. Of better, than, Transcend. Maybe Sandisk? Hard say.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SkedAddled
Goldmember
Avatar
2,002 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 240
Joined Jul 2008
Location: West Michigan
     
Jan 24, 2011 22:23 |  #35

shutterbug guy wrote:
if they are corrupted, then all these great selling points aren't so great anymore.

Why are you so concerned the cards will be corrupt?

I've got Transcend, SanDisk, and many other no-name cards holding sway for my uses. None have failed me yet. What makes you so certain that another brand will fail your needs?

I've yet to encounter a failed memory card.


Craig5D4|50D|S3iS|AF:Σ10-20|Canon 28-135 USM IS|MF:Tamron SP 28-80|Tamron SP 60-300|Soligor 75-260|Soligor 400|Soligor C/D 500|Zuiko 50 f/1.8|others
Support this exceptional forum
Of course I'm all right! Why? What have you heard?!?

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shutterbug ­ guy
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
205 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Thailand
     
Jan 25, 2011 07:37 |  #36

Evan Idler wrote in post #11708299 (external link)
If you buy one, and try it for a few weeks, and don't like it you can
always find someone else to buy it for probably close to what you paid
for it. Give or take a few dollars. It's not like were talking $799.95 to
try it.

Sometimes you just have to go for it!!

--Evan

Thanks for the advice. I'll more than likely keep it forever like the rest of my stuff and only replace it as needed. You're right it's not like a major lens purchase or something.

Regards,

Roger




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shutterbug ­ guy
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
205 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Thailand
     
Jan 25, 2011 07:40 |  #37

SkedAddled wrote in post #11708590 (external link)
Why are you so concerned the cards will be corrupt?

I've got Transcend, SanDisk, and many other no-name cards holding sway for my uses. None have failed me yet. What makes you so certain that another brand will fail your needs?

I've yet to encounter a failed memory card.

Thanks for the advice. Why the concern? I like to buy stuff once and plus I'll be using the heck out of these new cards in March and reliability will hopefully be a given by then. Like you, other than a failing micro-drive and that's another ballgame, I haven't had a failure yet either.

Regards,

Roger




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shutterbug ­ guy
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
205 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Thailand
     
Jan 25, 2011 07:42 |  #38

antitera wrote in post #11708328 (external link)
Here's my 2 pennies, of information. I speak, Transcend. Can thinK? Yes. Hard to, though. Of better, than, Transcend. Maybe Sandisk? Hard say.

Thanks for your input. That's what it is basically down to, Transcend and Sandisk. At the moment it appears both are pretty reliable.

Regards,

Roger




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pcj
Goldmember
Avatar
1,037 posts
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Templeton, MA
     
Jan 25, 2011 10:02 |  #39

shutterbug guy wrote in post #11706069 (external link)
That would be a nice surprise indeed. I'm not totally convinced yet but right now I'm looking hard at the Transcend 32gb 400x. That extra speed you're getting is tempting though...

Regards,

Roger

It arrived today - it's actually the 400x, and compared to my ultra II sandisk 8gb, it rocks!


7D (gripped) | GoPro Hero HD | Canon 70-200mm f/4 L | Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 | 40mm f/2.8 | 85mm f/1.8 | 28mm f/1.8 | 3 * 600EX-RT - All gear
http://www.rt2photo.co​m (external link)
http://www.facebook.co​m/rt2photo (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shutterbug ­ guy
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
205 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Thailand
     
Jan 26, 2011 08:21 |  #40

pcj wrote in post #11710936 (external link)
It arrived today - it's actually the 400x, and compared to my ultra II sandisk 8gb, it rocks!

Good deal, from what I've gathered so far that card is in the sweet spot of reliability. And I prefer the blue color over yellow anyway. :-) Enjoy!

Regards,

Roger




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JelleVerherstraeten
Goldmember
Avatar
2,440 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Antwerp, Belgium
     
Jan 26, 2011 09:05 |  #41

Save your money, and get some higher reading speeds and get the transcends!


-Jelle l Gear l Website (external link) l

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shutterbug ­ guy
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
205 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Thailand
     
Jan 26, 2011 11:14 |  #42

JelleVerherstraeten wrote in post #11717325 (external link)
Save your money, and get some higher reading speeds and get the transcends!

Is there an advantage to doing this? For instance will it clear the buffer on a 7D or 5DII faster? I realize that the download speeds into your hard drive will be quicker but I wonder what effect if any it will have on clearing the camera buffer (400x vs. 600x).

Regards,

Roger




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MCAsan
Goldmember
Avatar
3,836 posts
Likes: 68
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Atlanta
     
Jan 26, 2011 11:22 as a reply to  @ shutterbug guy's post |  #43

You should be able to get more shots at 8fps using a 7D with a faster card...before the card speed causes the buffer to back up. I believe that Frank calculated that at 8fps using raw files, a 7D would like to write around 180MBs. But fastest of cards will only write around 100MBs. So if you hold down the button long enough, the camera will have to wait on the buffer to write to the card before it can contine again at 8fps.

Perhaps the question is will it matter to your individual type of shooting. If you shoot animals or people in action (wildlife, sports) then it might be important to you to get the faster write speed card. For many photographers...not important...and for other very important.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Jan 26, 2011 12:22 |  #44

MCAsan wrote in post #11718128 (external link)
You should be able to get more shots at 8fps using a 7D with a faster card...before the card speed causes the buffer to back up.

You'd think that, wouldn't you? Because it does make logical sense. However, an experiment I did with cards of varying speeds - from 45MB/s to 3MB/s - showed that it took 20 shots to fill the buffer - regardless of which card was inside. Here's the data (external link). It really looks like the camera doesn't start writing to the card until the buffer is full.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MCAsan
Goldmember
Avatar
3,836 posts
Likes: 68
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Atlanta
     
Jan 26, 2011 19:12 as a reply to  @ hollis_f's post |  #45

Frank,

That is a most excellent set of test results and conclusions. I have ordered a USB 3 reader from Taiwan to go with my new computer build. When it is up and running I will compare downloads via USB 2, eSATA, and USB 3. Even if a fast write card will not give me much longer shot sequences at 8fps, a faster read speed card and USB 3 transport should take the pain of 16GB or 32GB downloads. I would like downloads that are at the limits of UDMA 6. Won't we all. ;)

I know I never want to download 64GB over USB 2 again after 12 hours of shooting.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

34,556 views & 0 likes for this thread
Transcend vs Sandisk CF Card Reliability
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Accessories 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is gardenchefs
843 guests, 311 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.