DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Do you need fast compact flash?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 9 of 9, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 01/11/2007 01:02:22 AM · #1
I was in the process of doing a 'valid' comparison of the performance of a standard Sandisk 1.0gb compact flash card with the Sandisk Ultra 2 1.0gb card to see if it was really worth the extra money to buy a faster card. However, when I started comparing the prices (at B&H) I found out that the Ultra 2 cards are about the same price as the standard cards, and cheaper in some instances.

Here are the results of the test I did anyway:

I set the camera at ISO 400 in high res jpg mode and shot at a very contrasty scene to make larger jpg files for this test...

Continuous burst before the camera paused:

Standard card - 12 photos
Ultra 2 card - 14 photos

10 frame burst with 3 second pause between bursts:

Standard card - 13 photos
Ultra 2 card - 16 photos

5 frame burst with 2 second pause between bursts:

Standard card - 14 photos
Ultra 2 card - 17 photos

Time to download 916mb from the card using a usb 2 reader:

Standard card - 2:39
Ultra 2 card - 1:37

These results would vary with different cameras. I used the Canon EOS 20d, but a camera with a larger internal buffer would perform better.

I thought it was interesting that the standard speed card performed almost as well as the 48x Ultra 2 card.

01/11/2007 01:09:59 AM · #2
Sandisk is notorious for not listing speeds on their cards (particularly their lower end cards) and duping people into buying them because of their name.

I avoid them at all costs because I believe I will get ripped off no matter what.

I own 2 4GB cards and recently sold my long standing 1GB card.

I have a 120x in my camera now and a 100X apacer in my PDA as backup for the camera if needed.

Having used a 1GB 45X in the 30D, I would say that it would only become a real issue if you were shooting 5FPS in RAW or max JPG or something.

I've noticed that playback is also a fair bit slower on the 1GB 45X, but very quick with the 4GB cards.

Both my current CF cards have lifetime warranties.
 01/11/2007 01:10:26 AM · #3
Thanks, I was curious to see how this would turn out. Do you think there is anything to a better build/reliability to a faster card?
I have a standard 1 gig SanDisk and A Hitachi MicroDrive 1 gig card, and the micro drive lags on downloads, but it came with a camera I received and seems a few years old. Neither one has had any problems besides that.
 01/11/2007 01:12:30 AM · #4
when I bought my D200 I found this speed comparison very helpful:card speed tests

There is a pull down to select many different cameras to see how they perform with many different cards.
 01/11/2007 01:26:19 AM · #5
Originally posted by Megatherian:
when I bought my D200 I found this speed comparison very helpful:card speed tests

There is a pull down to select many different cameras to see how they perform with many different cards.


That doesn't tell us much about how many pictures it can make before it chokes down though...
 01/11/2007 01:31:04 AM · #6
Microdrives are limited in speed due to their moving parts.

nice link mega... useful!

01/11/2007 01:34:03 AM · #7
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Originally posted by Megatherian:
when I bought my D200 I found this speed comparison very helpful:card speed tests

There is a pull down to select many different cameras to see how they perform with many different cards.


That doesn't tell us much about how many pictures it can make before it chokes down though...


well, not without a little math. But if you calulate your cameras buffer space with the average file size and write speed you can figure out pretty easily how each card will hold up.
 01/11/2007 01:44:25 AM · #8
I don't think I've ever filled my buffer shooting.

Then again, I'm not shooting sports or anything where I take long, high speed bursts of images. I don't really notice a difference between my old SanDisk 512MB cards and my new 2GB UltraII.

Still, it's good info to have if that kind of thing is what you shoot.
01/11/2007 01:45:29 AM · #9
Originally posted by Megatherian:

well, not without a little math. But if you calulate your cameras buffer space with the average file size and write speed you can figure out pretty easily how each card will hold up.


It will still vary significantly though. The numbers in my original post are MUCH LARGER if i shoot at ISO 100 and put the lenscap on the camera to shoot a black frame. That drives the file size down to a minimum. JPEG files vary in size due to color and contrast shifts. The more of that in the photo, the larger the file size, so I tried to create a worst case scenario.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 01/02/2026 04:10:38 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2026 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 01/02/2026 04:10:38 PM EST.