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 19 Mar 2006 (Sunday) 22:44
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Sandisk Ultra II vs Extreme III?

 
Jman215
Hatchling
1 post
Joined Mar 2006
     
Mar 19, 2006 22:44 |  #1

I have a canon digital rebel 300d. I also have a Sandisk Ultra II 512mb. I would like more speed, but can my camera handle that? If I get the Sandisk Extreme III 1 gig, will I see a big performance jump on my camera specifically?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Bob_A
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,438 posts
Gallery: 48 photos
Likes: 44
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Alberta, Canada
     
Mar 19, 2006 22:55 |  #2

You will see no difference. The Ultra II's are all you need for your 300D and all that I need for my 20D.


Bob
SmugMug (external link) | My Gear Ratings | My POTN Gallery

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NickSim87
Sir Chimp-a-lot
3,602 posts
Joined Dec 2005
Location: SE, Michigan
     
Mar 19, 2006 22:55 |  #3

No. The camera is the limitation.

I use Extreme III, but tests usually show that Ultra II's are just as fast, if not faster.


Gear List | Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Transonic
Senior Member
Avatar
329 posts
Joined Sep 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
     
Mar 19, 2006 22:59 |  #4

Ultra II - minimum write speed of 9 megabytes per second (MB/sec.) and a minimum read speed of 10MB/sec.

Extreme III - minimum write and read speeds of 20 megabytes per second.

Let me see if got this right. :rolleyes: If you're shooting jpeg at 2.5fps and your file sizes are like 2-3 megs then a CF card writing at 9MB/sec is enough even with a full buffer.

You might notice a difference in shooting RAW. Not sure how big the file sizes are but let's say they're 5mb each at 2.5fps and your buffer fills up... well you're gonna need a CF card that writes at 12.5mb/sec minimum to cover that burst. Either way, Ultra II should be enough for that camera.


1D Mark II N | Sigma 12-24mm | 17-40mm f4L | Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 | 50mm f1.4
6Gb
of Extreme III | 1Gb Ultra II Plus

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Transportithere
Goldmember
Avatar
1,092 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Puget Sound, U.S.A.
     
Mar 19, 2006 23:02 |  #5

Great answer.. I was thinking a faster write would save me the 5 sec or so wait I experience with my 300D ans Ultra II


POTN is a wonderful source of information.
POTN has taken me around the world.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bob_A
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,438 posts
Gallery: 48 photos
Likes: 44
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Alberta, Canada
     
Mar 19, 2006 23:04 as a reply to  @ Transportithere's post |  #6

Transportithere wrote:
the test results I read. stated that the Extreams are about twice as fast as the Ultra. What I dislike about my 300D with the Ultra II, is when I take a series of photos I need to wait 5 sec or more for the photos to load on to the CF card. I was hoping a faster cf card would make a differance.
But, you state different than the what I have read eariler.. I need more input...

The Extremes are fast, it's just that the 300D can't take advantage of the speed. It's a camera limitation, not a Ultra II limitation.


Bob
SmugMug (external link) | My Gear Ratings | My POTN Gallery

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
69,628 posts
Likes: 218
Joined Jun 2004
Location: Bethesda, MD USA
     
Mar 20, 2006 10:19 |  #7

Rob Galbraith's tested a variety of CF cards in the 300D (external link). None of them are blazing fast, because the camera can't push out the data fast enough.


Jon
----------
Cocker Spaniels
Maryland and Virginia activities
Image Posting Rules and Image Posting FAQ
Report SPAM, Don't Answer It! (link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.
PAYPAL GIFT NO LONGER ALLOWED HERE

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sweetride01
Member
53 posts
Joined Oct 2004
Location: Tampa, FL, and Southampton, UK
     
Mar 20, 2006 15:20 as a reply to  @ Jon's post |  #8

I just bought a 5D. I'm guessing this will require an Extreme III?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
69,628 posts
Likes: 218
Joined Jun 2004
Location: Bethesda, MD USA
     
Mar 20, 2006 15:37 |  #9

Rob's tested the 5D as well. Interestingly, a Lexar 133x was the fastest,and the 2 GB Ultra II fared better than the Extreme III.


Jon
----------
Cocker Spaniels
Maryland and Virginia activities
Image Posting Rules and Image Posting FAQ
Report SPAM, Don't Answer It! (link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.
PAYPAL GIFT NO LONGER ALLOWED HERE

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sweetride01
Member
53 posts
Joined Oct 2004
Location: Tampa, FL, and Southampton, UK
     
Mar 20, 2006 16:29 as a reply to  @ Jon's post |  #10

Jon wrote:
and the 2 GB Ultra II fared better than the Extreme III.

???Please explain???




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nater
Member
Avatar
201 posts
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Chicagoland
     
Mar 20, 2006 16:29 as a reply to  @ Sweetride01's post |  #11

Sweetride01 wrote:
I just bought a 5D. I'm guessing this will require an Extreme III?

Require? The camera will write images to the cheapest card you can find!

CF card speed really comes into play when shooting bursts. I don't think a lot of people use the 5D for a lot of really long bursts since it's limited to 3FPS. Most sports/wildlife shooters use the 20D or 1D Mark II.


Canon 70D || Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 || Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS || Canon 24-105 f/4L || Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS || Sigma 30 f/1.4 || Canon 50 f/1.4 || Canon 85 f/1.8 || Canon 60 f/2.8 Macro || Rokinon 8 f/3.5 fisheye
Feisol CT-3401N Tripod || Kirk BH-3 Ballhead
Buy & Sell Feedback: POTN || FredMiranda (external link) || ebay (external link) ~~~ Pro tip: Separate focus from shutter (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sweetride01
Member
53 posts
Joined Oct 2004
Location: Tampa, FL, and Southampton, UK
     
Mar 20, 2006 17:41 as a reply to  @ nater's post |  #12

nater wrote:
Require? The camera will write images to the cheapest card you can find!

What poor wording of me. Of course I know this. But 3fps for 10mb images (If I were to do that) would mean that there may be less of a block-up I suppose.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
denMAR
Senior Member
Avatar
362 posts
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
     
Mar 20, 2006 17:43 |  #13

You know I've been trying to get a 2GB Ultra II for almost three weeks ago but everytime I go to Costco they're sold out! Must be because they just dropped from 230 to 100 bucks so if you're in Canada invest.


denMAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nater
Member
Avatar
201 posts
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Chicagoland
     
Mar 20, 2006 17:54 as a reply to  @ Sweetride01's post |  #14

Sweetride01 wrote:
???Please explain???

He's referring to this page: http://www.robgalbrait​h.com …ti_page.asp?cid​=6007-8198 (external link)

Rob Galbraith does extensive tests of different CF cards in different cameras. It lets you see exactly how much performance gain (or loss) you're getting for the money with your particular equipment.


Canon 70D || Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 || Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS || Canon 24-105 f/4L || Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS || Sigma 30 f/1.4 || Canon 50 f/1.4 || Canon 85 f/1.8 || Canon 60 f/2.8 Macro || Rokinon 8 f/3.5 fisheye
Feisol CT-3401N Tripod || Kirk BH-3 Ballhead
Buy & Sell Feedback: POTN || FredMiranda (external link) || ebay (external link) ~~~ Pro tip: Separate focus from shutter (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sweetride01
Member
53 posts
Joined Oct 2004
Location: Tampa, FL, and Southampton, UK
     
Mar 20, 2006 18:06 as a reply to  @ nater's post |  #15

So the Extreme III is faster than the Ultra II for RAW files, but not the JPEG images. How does this make sense?




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

34,186 views & 0 likes for this thread
Sandisk Ultra II vs Extreme III?
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 Sureshot99
461 guests, 364 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

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.