|
Forums >
Photography Talk >
"Ultra" media - is it really faster/better?
So it it really worth the extra money for the "Ultra" type media (for example: http://www.sandisk.com/retail/ultra2-cf.asp ), or is it all marketing hype? Oct 02 05 08:44 pm Link Can't comment in general but you might want to check here http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_ … p?cid=6007 for specific card-camera combinations. Oct 02 05 09:14 pm Link It is not marketing hype. There are different grades in flash memory chips regardless of format (CF, SD, MM etc. etc). You should use the fastest card supported by your camera but not to waste money on faster ones. For example, let's say you have a Canon 10D. Its fastest write-speed is 1.5Mb/s, which is 10X (1X being 150kb/s). You will not notice any improvement with a 60X card if you already have a 10X. The read-write speed is determined by the slowest interface. However, if you use an external card reader for your card, you will notice a difference between a 10X card and a 60X card, because the contraints is no longer the camera interface. For USB 2.0, you can have more than 10Mb/s, which is more than 60X, and your card's speed becomes the slowest in the chain. I hope this helps a little. Oct 03 05 02:20 am Link its a noticable difference especially if you shoot in contious pr burst mode. It's also alot faster whne you are transfering the photos to your computer (especially if you are using a usb2 card reader) but im just speaking from experience. Oct 03 05 03:58 am Link It definately makes a difference. Test if you will. Get a standard issue CF card (1x) and shoot a burst (3 shots minimum) and see how long it takes to write. Do the same with an Ultra and see ho long that takes. I use Ultra II's and Transcend 60X and am happy with the speed. Had to use a standard a couple of weeks ago, as I had run out of shigh speed and was astounded as to how slow they were. How soon we forget! Oct 03 05 10:13 am Link Comparing a 1x to a 60x on, say, a 10D would definitely show a difference. BUT, if you compare a 10x to a 60x there won't be any difference because it is restricted by the speed of the interface (even in burst mode, because that does not change the interface speed). Again, it's always constrained by the slowest interface (bottleneck effect). It's actually pretty hard to find 1x cards these days.  Also, if you are thinking long-term, get the fastest cards you can afford now, because the interfaces within the newer cameras are getting faster all the time. For example, the replacement for 10D, the 20D, has an interface that supports up to a claimed 40x (4 times faster than the 10D!), so if you use a 10x card then you are limiting the speed. If, however, you have a 60x card, then you are well-prepared for subsequent upgrades. If you are interested, NewEgg has a 1Gb Kingston Elite Pro (35x) card for $50.55 and a Transcend 1Gb 80x card for $65. At these prices...just get the fastest you can get. But IMO, the Ultra is indeed a little overpriced, you are paying for brandname, but the internal chips are always from that same few manufacturers. Oct 03 05 12:12 pm Link When I shot with the Dreb, I noticed a huge difference. I use the Extreme cards and as a backup, I use the Sams Club brand my mother in law got me for a stocking stuffer. Actually, she got me 4 512's so it's an additional 2gig. Oct 04 05 12:19 am Link A lot does depend on the model camera but most DSLR's and prosumer models will benefit from the faster cards. Additionally they have faster read speeds so you images will transfer to you computer faster which is a time saver. the sandisc Ultra cards also have a lifetime warranty vs 5 years on reg cards Bob Oct 04 05 12:34 am Link mag-jr wrote: I wouldn't be surprised. The Sam's Club cards (as far as I could find out) are just 4x cards. The Extreme III (I assume?) is a 133x card, so it's likely just being limited by the camera. That would probably also mean that you won't have to upgrade your card for a LONG time. Oct 04 05 01:02 am Link the "x" speeds on various CF cards are not standardized and they dont really mean anything in terms of comparison between brands. Your best bet is to look at the Real World testing - Rob Galbraiths site - and see what brand and type are the fastest. Also see how they perform in your specific camera model. As someone else pointed out, some cameras have a slower top write speed than the faster CF cards. However - keep in mind that a faster card will always help you out when writing from the CF card to your computer. Oct 04 05 01:17 am Link Havent read the whole thread, but what QuaeVide recomended is the site to goto , for the most part most consumer and semi-pro type cameras, say under 20D type cameras, arnt going to take the greatest benefit of the faster speeds of the flash cards. The more professional cameras will however. Oct 04 05 01:44 am Link StevenNoreyko wrote: The X speed is standardized by IEEE (the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineering where I am a member) and the CompactFlash Association. 1x = 150kb/sec. The same standard applies to CD-Rom as well. Oct 04 05 01:56 am Link Just gota remeber, like computers, the total speed is the speed of the slowest part (ie: chain is only strong as it's weakest link). You can get a very fast card, but may feel like money wasted if your setup cant deliver. And I confirm the above to be true as well, however there are certain brands that have special technology that has to also be utilized by the camera to hit, for example sandisk for the most part will hit their speeds if the hardware provides not so much a software issue, but something like lexar which uses WA ( Write Accelleration ), dont always work with every camera, even if that particular camera would be perfectly capable of hitting the speeds in a normal situation. Oct 04 05 05:38 am Link |
