Memory card, will I notice the difference?

B

bildo

Messages
606
Name
Bill
Edit My Images
Yes
I like to do motorsport photography when I can, this obviously means at times I push the SD card to the limit.

I got a D7100 today, so it's eating the 16GB SD card I have for breakfast a LOT quicker than my D5100.

I have the Sandisk Ultra 30MB/s 32GB, and the Sandisk Extreme 45MB/s 16GB.

I've noticed there are Extreme Pro now, with 95MB/s, but at £50 for a 32GB one it's a fair whack! Would my D7100 be able to take advantage of this card, or would I be wasting my money when I could just get another 45MB/s?
 
Those speeds quoted are normally read speeds - its the write speed you need as fast as possible.
As far as I know the 7100 should be better with faster cards as it can clear the buffer quicker. I know my 7000 is better on faster cards.
What are you setting the two card slots to? I believe if you set one to RAW and the other to JPEG that will also slow it down a bit - set them as overflow and it should be faster from what I have heard.
 
Thanks Julian, I had heard about the read speeds before but wasn't sure how much it applied. (Surely the write speeds must improve too?)

It's decent, normally manages about 8-10 shots quite quickly on my faster card but then there's a wait while it writes the data.

I always shoot RAW only, and it's set to overflow.
 
I noticed a big difference moving from the Ultra 30 mb/s to the Extreme Pro 95 mb/s. The buffer cleared much quicker, and I was able to review shots from a recent burst much more quickly.

The images also copy a lot faster off the card onto your computer when you get home. Might only save 5 to 10 minutes on a full card vs the slower ones, but when you multiply that by the number of times you'll use the card you quickly save a few hours of your time which is well worth the premium to me :)
 
Think it also depends on if you machine gun your shots - if you don't, then personally I wouldn't pay for the expense of a very fast card as you'll not really see the benefit.
 
From what ive read the 7100 suffers woefully on it's buffer space.

Im looking at upgrading my body next year however the lack of articulated screen (yeah I know however I actually do use mine occasionally) and the buffer fill time are the main negatives.

Any advantage to you shooting in lower resolution or are you at the full range of your telephoto collection?
 
andyred said:
Think it also depends on if you machine gun your shots - if you don't, then personally I wouldn't pay for the expense of a very fast card as you'll not really see the benefit.
Click to expand...

Agreed, I use burst now and then.. but dont notice any difference between my 30mb 40mb or 60mb cards..I ahve had some extremeIII 30mb cards for yrs..worlk great.. I change cards a lot on a job and have no idea what speed card I put in as i cant tell..
 
depends on camera write speed, I have the transcend 90/45 card, and that's fast and not too expensive.

sandisk is the only make with 95 or near that write speed
 
I got to put this to practise today (I decided to order the 95mb/s card just to be safe.) I also used my 45mb/s and 30mb/s.

45mb/s seemed sufficient, 30mb/s was painfully slow. I'd take a few shots in a row and then it'd have a blank screen for about 10 seconds until the images loaded.

Definitely won't be using 30mb/s for motorsport again!
 
pingu666 said:
use the slower card for paddock stuff :)
Click to expand...

Just worked this one out for myself as well. You don't need a bag full of fast cards. I have a couple of fast 16gb cards and some slower/cheaper 8gb cards for the static stuff. All Sandisk though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top