What size memory card do you shoot with?

I'm using only 16bg cards in my 5D mkII cameras for portraits. I normally use one per job. I've got 8 of them so that I don't have to reuse a card before delivering the job to the client.

But I use 128gb cards in my 70D cameras for video. I've got 18 of them for the same reason (I normally use three cards per job)

I quit from video on DSLR years ago after getting iPhone. Anyone remembers comparison of 5DMKII with L and iPhone video side by side? I do and this is why I'm doing it on iPhone.
I also quit from RAW. Remember weddings photographer from Alberta with two 40D? He was the one who switched back to JPEG1.
All of my valuable images after final editing are re-sized to 2800 pixels at longer side for quick transferring, browsing, redundancy multi-storage, uploading and no hassle printing anywhere. I'm not even using 16MP in camera files. And still never been limited by prints size (I don't have money, space, need for posters).
In 2016 I went to two weeks trip with all day, every day shooting and 8 GB card was enough.

It's about an inch square, but quite thin

12MP camera, 16GB memory cards.

I use 16gb Sandisk Extreme Pro CF cards. I like to use multiple smaller cards for security (not having all my eggs in 1 basket). With my 1d4 I can easily shoot 500 RAW images on the 16gb CF cards and I have a 16gb SD card installed for backup. In my 5d2 I usually shot less than 300 RAWs at an event so a 16gb still works fine.

Being cost conscience, I wait for a sale on the smaller cards

regards,
dms

dsuitor wrote in post #18249479
I use 16gb Sandisk Extreme Pro CF cards. I like to use multiple smaller cards for security (not having all my eggs in 1 basket). With my 1d4 I can easily shoot 500 RAW images on the 16gb CF cards and I have a 16gb SD card installed for backup. In my 5d2 I usually shot less than 300 RAWs at an event so a 16gb still works fine.

Being cost conscience, I wait for a sale on the smaller cards

regards,
dms

I wouldn't call 16 GB a small card. But the idea of using a bunch of small cards to reduce risk is IMO probably not valid. What poses a greater risk, a card just sitting in your camera, or cards being removed and replaced from time to time in the field? The latter poses a much greater risk of corruption and physical loss IMO.

Archibald wrote in post #18249494
I wouldn't call 16 GB a small card. But the idea of using a bunch of small cards to reduce risk is IMO probably not valid. What poses a greater risk, a card just sitting in your camera, or cards being removed and replaced from time to time in the field? The latter poses a much greater risk of corruption and physical loss IMO.

Just to state a personal opinion of considerations:

1. The chances of me screwing up are greater than the chances of a card screwing itself up. That's based on the fact that I've screwed up more than once before, but I've never in the last decade suffered a card failure.

2. While "don't put all your eggs into one basket" is a good philosophy, at some point, increasing the number of cards in my hand begins to raise the odds of me screwing up at least one. I tend to be more reliable with fewer cards to manage.

If I were still shooting weddings, I'd go with a dual-card camera (I used to go with two cameras and swap a lot, even back in the film days--saved my hash once).

Shooting portraits and other theoretically reshootable work, I'm satisfied with a single card per job. I am also, however, in the PPA Indemnity Trust...which will cover me if I ever get sued for "malpractice."

8GB cards in a 1DIV. Four hundred RAWS per card. That's enough for me. Normally I would shoot a lot less than that.

I've only had a card go bad on me once. It was when me and another guy were doing tests on the camera. The card was going in and out of the camera so we could see the results on the computer. Suddenly it wouldn't read. I'm thinking it's probably because it got yanked out of the card reader before it was done what it needed to do. After some fiddling we got it going again, so no permanent loss.

But the message for me was that manipulating a card carries a risk. Now I'm very careful to make sure all processes are done, both in the camera and the computer, before pulling the card - no matter how much of a hurry I'm in.

Don't like the idea of putting all the eggs in one basket, so I don't use any card larger than 16GB for photos and 32GB for videos.

Great discussing going on here. Is it safer to use multiple small cards or a single large one? I have dual slots so I stick in two 128GB cards - one SD and one CF. I really hate swapping things. Even lenses, so I carry two cameras when I need to. I never fill them when shooting stills but I shoot video as well so that can take up a lot of space. And I'm shooting only 1080p30. I can't imagine how much 4K video consumes.

My card stays in the camera all the time and I transfer images to the computer with the supplied cable....never bothered with a card reader....

Main cards are 64gb (PNY SD's in D610, and Lexar 1000x in D800e), but backup/secondary cards are 32gb since I only save jpgs to those.

128gb (sony brand) x2. Probably overkill, even if I shoot 4K (I dont even bother shooting highest bitrate either, hate the file sizes).

Archibald wrote in post #18249494
I wouldn't call 16 GB a small card. But the idea of using a bunch of small cards to reduce risk is IMO probably not valid. What poses a greater risk, a card just sitting in your camera, or cards being removed and replaced from time to time in the field? The latter poses a much greater risk of corruption and physical loss IMO.

Point taken.

98kellrs wrote in post #18247571
It's not just size you need to consider, but also write speed.

True, but as I write this the 128 GB has one vote. It isn't because 128's are slow! In fact you might be able to make the argument (or twist the numbers) to show that the larger the card the faster they may be. Advancements in technology that enable the existence of a 128 card are often coupled with technology that improves read and write speeds.