Beginner Memory card

Messages
224
Name
Fabien
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi

Sorry if it is a very basic question but a memory card for me is a component to store photos on it with variable memory sizes.

So why could it be a large difference in price between 2 16GB cards?
What should I look for when buying a card?

Thanks.
 
it could be a few things, make/name, speed ?, type of card

just a guess
 
ok. What is the speed for?
Is it how fast the photo is stored on the card or what?
 
ok. What is the speed for?
Is it how fast the photo is stored on the card or what?

It's how fact the image moves (writes/copy's) from the camera temporary memory (buffer) to the card, and also how quick the images can be downloaded onto your computer
 
The main thing is the speed the photo is transferred from the camera to the memory card. A slow card such as a 25 MB/s card is going to take a lot longer than one that for example is a 90 MB/s card.
Ok so why bother spending more on a fast card against a slower one?
Simple answer is if you do a burst of shots one after the other the camera will "stall" in the transfer waiting for the slow card to absorb the data from the camera. A faster card can process the data quicker so less chance of a camera "stalling" . Then again there is the subject of "class" of card. For example a card with a class 4 is not as good as a class 10. If you did video work often camera manufactures recommend higher than class 4 as that is the minimum a camera will record at.
When buying a memory card one should always read ALL the information on a card not just capacity it will take
 
Last edited:
Bazza (Realspeed) sums it up pretty well but being a bit of a pedant - not a complete one - there are a couple of points I think need to be made. Firstly, whilst a 90Mb/s card is definately faster than a 25Mb/s one you may not see all of the difference in your camera. There is a limit to the speed at which the camera can transfer data to the card just as there is a limit to the speed at which the card can receive the data. In effect, therefore, there is no benefit to using a card which can accept data faster than the camera can send it - check your camera's handbook for data transfer rates.

Secondly Bazza says "a card with a class 4 is not as good as a class 10". The word "good" here is a bit of a misnomer as class refers to speed and is not a sign of quality. I acknowledge the conversation is about speed but if I had to read Bazza's comment twice then so might others and they may still not get the message.

No offence meant Bazza, just trying to make sure everyone understands what you were saying :)
 
I'll repost a warning here I put against another question: beware that there are a lot of FAKE cards out there. They can be very hard indeed to tell from the real ones, and will often be made in the same factories using B-grade parts. Price isn't always a clue - some are sold for the same price as kosher parts. I buy all my cards from reputable outlets - usually Amazon but SOLD BY Amazon.

As for the rest - it's all been well said here. Capacity and speed of transfer are the two main issues. Quality = reliability and longevity, with Kingston, sandisk (my personal choice), transcend and Lexar being good names.
Hope this helps!
 
Bazza (Realspeed) sums it up pretty well but being a bit of a pedant - not a complete one - there are a couple of points I think need to be made. Firstly, whilst a 90Mb/s card is definately faster than a 25Mb/s one you may not see all of the difference in your camera.


True... and something few realise. They just go and buy the fastest cards they can find without thinking things through, or doing a bit of research.

This site gives actual speeds achieved when the camera writes to the card. He doesn't update it that frequently, but most popular Canon and Nikon are on there, and even if not, it gives you an idea of the disparity between advertised speeds and the actual speeds you'll see.

http://www.robgalbraith.com/multi_pagee519.html?cid=6007

As for using the camera with a lead to transfer files to the computer (does anyone actually still do this??) then unless your camera supports USB3.0, and so does your computer, then you're stuck at around 12MB/sec anyway. Even with an external card reader.... unless both reader and PC/Mac support USB3.0... you're at 12MB/sec.
 
Last edited:
This site gives actual speeds achieved when the camera writes to the card. He doesn't update it that frequently, but most popular Canon and Nikon are on there, and even if not, it gives you an idea of the disparity between advertised speeds and the actual speeds you'll see.

http://www.robgalbraith.com/multi_pagee519.html?cid=6007

Thanks for the link but the results they give for the 60d is " ---Results for this camera are pending, but we don't have a posting date at this time---"
and page was last updated in 2012.
 
True... and something few realise. They just go and buy the fastest cards they can find without thinking things through, or doing a bit of research.

This site gives actual speeds achieved when the camera writes to the card. He doesn't update it that frequently, but most popular Canon and Nikon are on there, and even if not, it gives you an idea of the disparity between advertised speeds and the actual speeds you'll see.

http://www.robgalbraith.com/multi_pagee519.html?cid=6007

As for using the camera with a lead to transfer files to the computer (does anyone actually still do this??) then unless your camera supports USB3.0, and so does your computer, then you're stuck at around 12MB/sec anyway. Even with an external card reader.... unless both reader and PC/Mac support USB3.0... you're at 12MB/sec.

Yes I still use the lead to transfer the files to the computer as I believe the card is most at risk of being damaged/corrupted when it's being plugged/unplugged to and from the ports. It's a job I do when I get home and just go and put the kettle on or get a beer while waiting. An added bonus is I never leave the house without the cards in the camera ready to go, although I have been known to leave the actual camera behind. :rolleyes:
 
Thanks for the link but the results they give for the 60d is " ---Results for this camera are pending, but we don't have a posting date at this time---"
and page was last updated in 2012.

I did say it was not well updated.. however... looking at similar cameras gives you a clear idea if how speeds at which the camera handles the data is often MUCH slower than the faster rated cards... even cameras renowned for speed such as the Canon EOS1 series and Nikon D3s ect.

In by far the majority of cases, buying cards faster than 40 or 50MB/s is utterly pointless. If you're downloading from a decent crd reader over USB3.0 then there's some time to be saves, but while the card is in the camera, having RAW files written to it... anything over 40MB/sec will be absolutely fine. It's just a myth that these stupidly fast cards like the Lexar 160MB/sec cards actually offer a measurable advantage.
 
accidental misquote.. ignore
 
Last edited:
... sorry... firefox is just being an arse... nothing to see... move along....
 
Last edited:
Just to hijack this how many photos would a 16gb hold shooting raw on an Oly E-PL5?
 
Thanks for the link but the results they give for the 60d is " ---Results for this camera are pending, but we don't have a posting date at this time---"
and page was last updated in 2012.
I upgraded my card when I still had my 650d and it definitely made a difference going from a basic class 10 SD card to a Sandisk card with 95Mbit/s. Whether the camera or the card were the bottleneck I don't know but I wasn't about to faff around trying different speed cards to see where the extra speed stopped :p
 
Just watch out for cards with the exact same specification yet differently priced, for example one from SanDisk will cost you twice as much as one from Transcend, but if you've got money to burn.. :)
 
Back
Top