Memory Card Writing Speed

I currently have 32gb San Disk card with 95mb writing speed. I have not used larger capacity cards above 32gb or cards with higher than 95mb writing speed. Looking into getting a 64gb.

To those that have or are familiar with higher storage capacity cards and/or writing speed are they truly faster to some extent? I can imagine it won't make a difference if someone has a very slow/old not up to date computer. I have a year old gaming computer, somewhere in the lower end as I only paid about $700.

Just trying to figure out if really worth getting the memory cards based on brand/writing speed. Thanks in advanced.

What camera do you shoot with? Do you shoot video or take a lot of burst shots especially in raw? If so, it might help. But if you want to take a look at performance impacts, check out this site.

Canon 80D. Do shoot in raw/jpg and I have not done video yet. I don't do continuous shooting. Have been contemplating as I would like to make small videos. Thanks for the link.

There is one potential downfall to the 64GB card. I bought two of the cards and I found that the total number of images that can be stored now makes the image counter read 999 for about 1/2 the capacity of the card. I think this was true of both my 60D and 80D although I did not test the 80D not do I have it with me. But you can test it by placing an “empty” 32GB card into the 80D and then reading the image counter and note the number of digits. Double that number and you will have approximately the number of images for a 64GB card.

The inability to read the image counter for much of the card capacity may or may not be an issue. See the thread at
https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=18859577 for a related discussion.

firme wrote in post #18967602
I currently have 32gb San Disk card with 95mb writing speed. I have not used larger capacity cards above 32gb or cards with higher than 95mb writing speed. Looking into getting a 64gb.

To those that have or are familiar with higher storage capacity cards and/or writing speed are they truly faster to some extent? I can imagine it won't make a difference if someone has a very slow/old not up to date computer. I have a year old gaming computer, somewhere in the lower end as I only paid about $700.

Just trying to figure out if really worth getting the memory cards based on brand/writing speed. Thanks in advanced.

The information you want is on this website. It lists actual writing speed tests with many cards and many cameras.

https://www.cameramemo​ryspeed.com/

Here the page for the 80D:

https://www.cameramemo​ryspeed.com/canon-80d/sd-card-comparison/

John from PA wrote in post #18967663
There is one potential downfall to the 64GB card. I bought two of the cards and I found that the total number of images that can be stored now makes the image counter read 999 for about 1/2 the capacity of the card. I think this was true of both my 60D and 80D although I did not test the 80D not do I have it with me. But you can test it by placing an “empty” 32GB card into the 80D and then reading the image counter and note the number of digits. Double that number and you will have approximately the number of images for a 64GB card.

The inability to read the image counter for much of the card capacity may or may not be an issue. See the thread at
https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=18859577 for a related discussion.

I haven't found that to be a real-life issue.

The San Disk Extreme Pro95 mb/s card is about the fastest card you can get for a camera that supports UHS-I. The cards that are substantially faster than that are UHS-II cards. If your camera only supports UHS-I, then the only improvement you will see using a UHS-II card will be your download speed from your card reader to your hard drive. It is unlikely you will see any improvement from using the newer class card as far as the camera itself is concerned.

Edit: The UHS-II cards have two rows of contacts. If your camera does not have the extra row of contacts, the UHS-II card works as a UHS-I card. The Canon 80d does not have the extra row of contacts. No gain at all until you take the card out of your camera and put it in a reader that supports UHS-II.

You mention Write speed and unless you are doing something unique, the camera writes to the card, your computer reads the card.
If you had an EOS-R, it has a UHS-II slot and can not only make use of it, has one of the fastest if not fastest write speeds of current cameras.

Other than purchasing a card with future EOS R ownership in mind the Sandisk 95mb/s card is the go and will still work well in the R anyway.

John from PA, did try an empty 32gb, I shows up as 723 when I have raw/jpg. When in raw it jumps to 917 but don't shoot in raw only.

------

RDKirk, thanks for the link. Did check the results.

The card I actually have was for a camcorder I have that also uses sd cards. So that card was not initially meant for the 80d. I do have one for the camera but its at 16gb. That was a mistake when I purchased it. But do remember when I purchased as it was cheap. SandDisk Extreme Pro HC I 95 mb/s

------

Nogo, thanks for your reply. Did not know that information. Good to know not to get those card types then.

------

Choderboy, that was going to be my next topic on having the files download to the computer straight from the memory card still inserted in the camera. Well that is how I have been downloading so far, I don't have an actual card reader. Not looking to get a new camera any time soon.

Nogo, in this case, I wouldn't mind having fast downloading speed to the computer. Seems I would have to get a good card reader then that would support the UHS-II card. Sorry I misread your edited post.

https://www.cameramemo​ryspeed.com/canon-80d/sd-card-comparison/

In brief, most any card rated at 95mb or 2000X
...but there are some 'slow' ones, like the Sony 95mb rated 32GB

firme wrote in post #18968144
John from PA, did try an empty 32gb, I shows up as 723 when I have raw/jpg. When in raw it jumps to 917 but don't shoot in raw only.

My point is with a 64GB card, and using your numbers from the 32GB card, you would now have the capability of 1446 images (RAW/JPG) so for roughly 447 images your counter would show 999. If that doesn’t bother you, go for the 64GB card. There is also the argument not to put all your eggs in the same basket. I personally would rather have (2) 32’s than a single 64.

John from PA, I'm not so picky as to that I have to have a 64gb vs a 32gb. Doesn't take long to change them either way. The difference is I did see buying two 32gb is better than buying one 64gb card. But doesn't apply to every card though. Thanks for the help.