The silly state of dual memory card.

Messages
6,611
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
#1
Big rant coming up.

Let’s go back 6 years? When Canon released the 5Dmk3 with CF/SD card slots, great, but when we know that the SD card slots is throttled by the slower write speed we all wondered who made this stupid decision.

Surely one of the most important reason to have a dual card slots is back up. You can use it for expanded memory but let’s be honest here, this camera is a top end, professional grade camera and those who relies on it will use it for back up. And before you say “why don’t you write Jpegs?” I have personally tested it, the buffer will fill up faster and actually you get LESS shots if you shoot RAW/JPEG instead of dual RAW. The other thing is….true back up is having 2 of the same files, so Jpeg is not a true back up.

Having no other option really, with heavily invested in Canon glass, I bought one and suck it up.

Now…..rant on 5D3 over, they did the same again with the 5D4…..same again. WTF.

Again, having even more Canon glass now, bought it again.

Sony do it too now on the A9, A7Riii, and now the A7iii.

WHY ?!!?!?! This cannot to do with cost, it can’t, they managed to add in 5 axis IBIS, increased all the tech and keep the prices about the same, don’t tell me you can’t afford to put in 2 UHS-II slots, wack on another £100, I’d pay it, wait 6 months until the price go down then release it….wait, D850 is a year old….how long do you need to wait? This problem has been around for over half a decade, what the hell. Nikon can do it for their D850. It’s not a technical limitation. What is it?

I can imagine now at this point someone will say “the buffer is large enough, you don’t need to machine gun it.” If you take that stance then why not make a camera that takes 1FPS? There are many situations where you need that speed and buffer, just because you don’t need it, doesn’t mean other people don’t. i.e. confetti shot walking couple towards you. The walk is about 20 seconds, you get 1 chance, they are not throwing it again. You are walking backwards, you are composing and shooting, you can’t judge guess when out of the hundreds and thousands of confetti/rice/pedals will land and whether you might capture the expression….there is always that pedal that land right in front of their eye blocking it. You need that FPS and buffer and write speed.

So…they can do it, the tech is there.

Is it about money,l? it’s £3,000!

Is it to drive people further up the models? Really? It’s a £3,000 camera, the A7Riii is arguably the flagship for their high res body, there is no higher up the range if you want that resolution.

It is clear someone somewhere made a decision to gimp the camera because they can. I can’t honestly imagine an engineer speccing and designing and says….”let’s make one of these slot slower because that is what people want.” If you are going to do that, might as well put both to be slow UHS-I. This isn’t a “choice” so if you want to shoot in a faster slot or slower slot you can. I can’t imagine why you want to shoot in the UHS-I slots.

At this point someone will probably say “I only shoot 1 slot and use the other as more storage”……well, having 2 x UHS-II slots is hardly going to hurt you then is it? so……………….argument = moot.

This has got to stop Sony/Canon. This is ridiculous.
 
Messages
6,891
Name
Jeff
Edit My Images
No
#3
theres always that PEDAL that lands right in front of their eye :exit::exit:

did someone throw the BIKE at you :LOL::LOL::LOL:
 
Messages
1,298
Name
Jonathan
Edit My Images
Yes
#4
By the same logic, why don't cameras simply have more buffer memory?
After all, you can buy a decent quality 128GB micro SD card for £35, so memory is cheap - but of course buffer memory is more specialised high speed memory, so the cost is higher - but still, you woudl have thought in cameras costing over £1000, there should be plenty of scope in the budget for more than they generally have.

The problem with dual card slots is you need to have the processing power and bandwidth to get the data to both slots - it's not simply the cost of a faster card reader, so making the 'secondary' slot slower saves more than at might first be apparent.

What the price difference would actually be I don't know - but it may simply be a case that they each look at the competition, see everyone else only havs 1 fast card, so don't view it as something that will make enough difference to improve sales.
 
OP
OP
Raymond Lin
Messages
6,611
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
#5
By the same logic, why don't cameras simply have more buffer memory?
After all, you can buy a decent quality 128GB micro SD card for £35, so memory is cheap - but of course buffer memory is more specialised high speed memory, so the cost is higher - but still, you woudl have thought in cameras costing over £1000, there should be plenty of scope in the budget for more than they generally have.

The problem with dual card slots is you need to have the processing power and bandwidth to get the data to both slots - it's not simply the cost of a faster card reader, so making the 'secondary' slot slower saves more than at might first be apparent.

What the price difference would actually be I don't know - but it may simply be a case that they each look at the competition, see everyone else only havs 1 fast card, so don't view it as something that will make enough difference to improve sales.
Nikon can do it.

Everything else is an excuse.
 
Messages
3,978
Name
matt
Edit My Images
Yes
#9
Back pocket for 7D3?
 
Messages
339
Name
Dougie
Edit My Images
Yes
#10
Have you ever emailed or spoke to Canon asking for an explanation or future plans ?

Surely they do listen to customers views ?

Dougie.
 

StewartR

Efrem Zimbalist Jr
Advertiser
Messages
11,807
Name
Stewart
Edit My Images
Yes
#13
Have you not seen all the videos over the internet of the A7iii and adapted Canon glass? Looks awesome.

It’s what I would buy if I had a cupboard full of Canon glass.
The A7 iii also has one card slot that doesn't work at UHS-II speeds, same as the A7R iii. It doesn't solve the OP's problem.
 
Messages
10,276
Edit My Images
Yes
#14
The X-T2 has dual card slots which accept UHS-II cards and AFAIK they both write at the same speed.

Of course OP would gave to accept the opprobrium directed at those who choose to go mirrorless :mad:
 
Messages
21,891
Edit My Images
Yes
#16
At which point are you constantly rapid shooting and find the write speed of the SD card impacts the number of images you can take?
I've never found it to be an issue, even shooting motorsport with spray and pray :)

Have you just tested it until you've found a problem or actually found it to be a real issue in a real life situation?

I shoot Raw to CF card and small jpeg to the SD card, a hangover from sunday morning sport, when I'd import the small jpeg to an ipad whilst walking back to the clubhouse, so I could run a slideshow of images next to my business cards pointing them to my website.

I've had my 5D mk3 for 6-7 years, not had a sandisk CF card fail and apart from the above use, I've rarely used the SD card images.
 
Messages
6,323
Name
Riz
Edit My Images
No
#17
Isn't the Sony reason something to do with the slower slot still being compatible with Memory Sticks?
I believe the problem is actually down to the amount of heat the SD cards / Slots generate as they are having to shift so much data about. At present having two UHS-II Slots was/could cause too much internal heat for the body to handle.
I suspect the next generation Sony A9 body might go up in size and contain 2x UHS-II slots, however writing RAW to both the UHS-I and UHS-II Slots in the Sony A9 doesnt affected write speeds too much in real-world usage.
 
Messages
1,298
Name
Jonathan
Edit My Images
Yes
#18
Nikon can do it.

Everything else is an excuse.
The D5 does appear to have 2 high speeds slots, but it is 'only' 20MP at 12FPS max (240 MP/s)
The D850 only has one QXD, the second slot begin SD - 45Mp at 9FPS is (405 MP/S)

The A9 is 24MP at 20 FPS (480 MP/S)

5D4 is 30MP at 7FPS (210 MP/S)

So clearly the 5D4 'could' have dual slots (as the D5 does), but it may be that the increased bandwidth requirements in the D850 and A9 make this more expensive.

An interesting experiment (if it's not been done already) would be to test how the dual slots actually perform
Shoot a static scene, so AF between shots is not an issue
1) Shoot at max burst using just slot 1 until camera slows, note time to fill, number of shots, and time to clear
2) Repeat with just slot 2
3) Repeat with writing identical to both slots

This would show how much faster the higher speed slot actually performs over the slower slot (comparing 1 and 2), and also if shooting dual slots is actually slower than just shooting to the slower slot (IE is the dual write truly parallel).
 

GTG

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,795
Edit My Images
Yes
#19
Could be worse. I got a D4 and 32GB XQD card is £75+ and card readers are somehow 20 times more expensive than SD/CF readers.

£120 quid for 32GB and the CF is a throttle for dual cards
 
Messages
6,323
Name
Riz
Edit My Images
No
#20
Could be worse. I got a D4 and 32GB XQD card is £75+ and card readers are somehow 20 times more expensive than SD/CF readers.

£120 quid for 32GB and the CF is a throttle for dual cards
Gulp.... time to move to the Sony A9? :D ;)
 

Kodiak Qc

Suspended / Banned
Messages
20,425
Name
French Canadian living in Europe since 1989!
Edit My Images
Yes
#21



My D3S and D3S have two CFs in them… cool!

IMO, I do not mind an XQD and an SDHX as in all my cameras,
the data is recorded on both cards. For me it has no conséquence
as I manipulate only the bigger card.
 

StewartR

Efrem Zimbalist Jr
Advertiser
Messages
11,807
Name
Stewart
Edit My Images
Yes
#22
An interesting experiment (if it's not been done already) would be to test how the dual slots actually perform
Shoot a static scene, so AF between shots is not an issue
1) Shoot at max burst using just slot 1 until camera slows, note time to fill, number of shots, and time to clear
2) Repeat with just slot 2
3) Repeat with writing identical to both slots

This would show how much faster the higher speed slot actually performs over the slower slot (comparing 1 and 2), and also if shooting dual slots is actually slower than just shooting to the slower slot (IE is the dual write truly parallel).
Better to use manual focus so that the AF system is taken completely out of the equation, even any miniscule times taken to confirm that the scene is still in focus.

But I assume that Raymond (the OP) has already done this before embarking on his Big Rant.
 
Messages
722
Edit My Images
No
#23
My view is the solution needs to be to stream all of the camera data straight into the cloud / NAS device (as many as you want). No need for these silly plastic cards then :p
 
Messages
5,565
Edit My Images
Yes
#24
My D500 takes XQD and SD. I got the fastest Lexar 32GB 2933x XQD 2.0 Card and the fastest Lexar Professional 32 GB Class 10 UHS-II 2000x Speed (300 MB/s) SDHC available at the time. I have had not got to the buffer limit when I have had both cards in, which I think is 200 shots. That's 20 secs at 10fps. I generally use 1-4 second bursts, and the the second card now used mostly as an overflow though. Even a 95Mb/s SD card can do 70 shots at 10 fps before having to slow down in the D500.

Slowing down the extra card slot seems penny pinching. And in such expensive cameras is inexcusable imho. If people need the feature they will either move to a system that can do it or continue to put up with such limitations like the OP. I suppose they figure that for the few that will be affected, a lot will be so invested in lenses and accessories as to put up with it. And fewer will actually change systems because of it. :rolleyes:

The same thing with USB sockets. To not be putting at least putting USB 3 sockets in a camera now is penny pinching again. If they incorporated fast wireless transfer of images into the camera they could maybe have an excuse, but they don't.
 
Messages
1,298
Name
Jonathan
Edit My Images
Yes
#25
My D500 takes XQD and SD. I got the fastest Lexar 32GB 2933x XQD 2.0 Card and the fastest Lexar Professional 32 GB Class 10 UHS-II 2000x Speed (300 MB/s) SDHC available at the time. I have had not got to the buffer limit when I have had both cards in, which I think is 200 shots. That's 20 secs at 10fps. I generally use 1-4 second bursts, and the the second card now used mostly as an overflow though. Even a 95Mb/s SD card can do 70 shots at 10 fps before having to slow down in the D500.

Slowing down the extra card slot seems penny pinching. And in such expensive cameras is inexcusable imho. If people need the feature they will either move to a system that can do it or continue to put up with such limitations like the OP. I suppose they figure that for the few that will be affected, a lot will be so invested in lenses and accessories as to put up with it. And fewer will actually change systems because of it. :rolleyes:

The same thing with USB sockets. To not be putting at least putting USB 3 sockets in a camera now is penny pinching again. If they incorporated fast wireless transfer of images into the camera they could maybe have an excuse, but they don't.
I'm a little confused by your response.

In the first paragraph you say you can do 70 shots at 10 fps while writing to the SD card, and that you tend to do 1-4s bursts, and that you've never hit the limit.
This means (as far as I can tell) that the only impact on you of using a slower (=cheaper) second slot is that your camera has cost less.
While none of us know how much extra the camera would be with the faster second slot, there would almost certainly be some extra cost - which would be of no practical benefit to you.

So why is their selling a camera without an unnecessary (to you, and probably to many of it's purchasers) extra function inexcusable?
 
OP
OP
Raymond Lin
Messages
6,611
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
#26
The camera can shoot faster if I just shoot CF only, it will clear the buffer faster, I have tested this. For those asking why don’t I do that then? The answer is obvious.

It’s a wedding, I need back up.

That really should be the only reason I need to give you. “I shoot motorsports….blah blah” and “I never had a card fail on me” is not an excuse, p.s. I have had images corrupted, and no, they are not on the same camera so can’t blame the camera; and no, I keep my cards in proper wallet/cases, and yes, take care of my gear. What does comments like “I shoot motorsports” mean anyway? Is motorsports is like weddings, and there is a 1 off confetti shots in motorsports? And is it because you never had a card failed on your means I should play Russian roulette with wedding photos? I am not sure people who never shot a wedding know the pressure of getting 1 chance at getting the shot vs sitting round on a camping chair by a circular track and given 60 laps shooting the cars going round and round. “Oops, missed it this time, It’ll come round again in 1 min 58seconds”, and it’s not like the car changes expression between moments, people’s faces change expression, there are 2 people in the shot minimum, I need both to have a desirable look, ideally I want everyone in the photo to have a desirable look, not blinking, arms not in distracting places, I need both to have their eyes not blocked. There are a lot of things that can make a composition and a moment. I don’t mean to nor want to compare the difficulty of both but it’s not a metal car that moves on a surface that has a fixed predictable. I am not saying one is harder than the other, but clearly one needs as much luck and “help” from gear as it can be. It would help.

FYI, when I was shooting 5D2, I once lost a memory card, a 2G card in a 18hour wedding shot, from the time stamp of other images in LR there was an 17min gap where I didn’t shoot anything….strange. I immediately contacted the venue to see if anyone handed it in and told the client but luckily at that point it was the evening reception so the only photos that were lost were guests getting their food at the buffet (I have others after that 17mins mark), but what I really felt bad about was the 1 posed image which the couple recall posing for. I actually recall that shot in my head, still do. Luckily they were fine about it but I can tell you that I was SICK to my stomach, and I still feel terrible about it, that was 7 years ago. Not shooting back up is NOT an option, and frankly baffled how anyone could even think it, nevermind suggesting it.

You learn your lesson once and once is all you need. It was why I shot in small cards, in case 1 card is corrupt or lost, to limit the loses.

Now you are thinking “people in the past never needed it same dual card slots and they did okay”. Hell, I have done it with the 5D3 and got nice images from it too, as is the 5D4. So what’s the problem you ask? I want BETTER images, I believe having higher write rate and not having to swap camera means I can get more shots in, it is safer for me to walk backwards not needing to change camera. The whole point is the get better photos. This could get me better photos, and how simple is that to fix this??? Identical card slots…it’s like I am asking for the moon or something.

I can’t imagine how having one being UHS-I can be a benefit to anyone. One can speculate whether it is CPU, one can speculate whether it is heat. I suggest let’s not speculate, get that card slot in there like Nikon has and get it done. They have had 6 years since the launch of the 5D3, and a full decade since the inception and R&D of the original 5D3. This problem isn’t news, this problem is something they know about for 10 years.

Get it sorted out already.
 
OP
OP
Raymond Lin
Messages
6,611
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
#27
At which point are you constantly rapid shooting and find the write speed of the SD card impacts the number of images you can take?
I've never found it to be an issue, even shooting motorsport with spray and pray :)

Have you just tested it until you've found a problem or actually found it to be a real issue in a real life situation?

I shoot Raw to CF card and small jpeg to the SD card, a hangover from sunday morning sport, when I'd import the small jpeg to an ipad whilst walking back to the clubhouse, so I could run a slideshow of images next to my business cards pointing them to my website.

I've had my 5D mk3 for 6-7 years, not had a sandisk CF card fail and apart from the above use, I've rarely used the SD card images.
The real life issue I ran into is the example I gave, confetti shot.

Like I said, Jpeg is not back up….not a solution.

and just because you never had a card fail, it's not a reason for me to go without back up.
 
Messages
1,563
Name
Brian
Edit My Images
Yes
#29
I really miss the days of film when we had two rolls of 36 exposure 35mm in the camera...

No - wait... I don't think I got that quite right.
 
Messages
10,276
Edit My Images
Yes
#30
I really miss the days of film when we had two rolls of 36 exposure 35mm in the camera...

No - wait... I don't think I got that quite right.
That's not quite as stupid as it sounds.
I went on a photo shoot a couple of months ago. OK, it was a trainspotters job so the place was full of anoraks. One guy had two identical film cameras on a bracket and a set up that enabled him to press both shutters at once. Heath Robinson was a beginner compared to that set up. Weighed a ton, probably due to all the scaffolding needed. He had both camera set identical so his shots would be identical. Camera settings were fixed at the start of the day. I didn't understand his reasoning so left him in a discussion about flange plate bolts or something equally obscure.
 

Kodiak Qc

Suspended / Banned
Messages
20,425
Name
French Canadian living in Europe since 1989!
Edit My Images
Yes
#31
OP
OP
Raymond Lin
Messages
6,611
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
#32
How did we manage in film days then?

No backup then. We just just relied on our equipment and we got on ok. At least I did.
I guess you can tell the woman I used to know whose photographer when he sent his film to be processed, the lab lost it all.

I can't believe people say "I got on just fine' as a reason. Wedding photography were once upon a time just about posing photos and you have to hold your face and not move for quite a long time.

Times move on…progress are made, standards go up.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
Raymond Lin
Messages
6,611
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
#35
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results"

©Albert Einstein
What's the alternative?

Sell 20k of Canon gear and switch over to Nikon? and loses out on the 85/1.2, the EXRT flashes, the TSE lenses that I have?

Or get Canon to fix this obvious flaw? No system is perfect but what i am asking is not a lot is it?

I mean is that that "insanity" to you?

or is the "sane" solution to do the switch then come back and moan about the lack of EX-RT flashes, how shooting they don't have dual pixel AF, etc etc?

What is the alternative? really?
 
Messages
3,634
Name
Terry
Edit My Images
Yes
#36
All I'm saying is if a user keeps buying "flawed" kit What incentive is there for Canon to fix it.

It's like constantly being unimpressed with a certain restaurant but continuing to frequent the establishment. You keep eating the food so why bother improving it?

I realise you have invested heavily in Canon glass though.
 
OP
OP
Raymond Lin
Messages
6,611
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
#37
All I'm saying is if a user keeps buying "flawed" kit What incentive is there for Canon to fix it.

It's like constantly being unimpressed with a certain restaurant but continuing to frequent the establishment. You keep eating the food so why bother improving it?

I realise you have invested heavily in Canon glass though.
You say it is insanity to repeat the same thing? But I ask you, what is the alternative?

What is the sane answer?
 
Messages
21,891
Edit My Images
Yes
#39
It's not a flaw though, or a fault. The only fault is with your expectations in trying to use something way outside its designed specification.
I'd say expecting to machine gun 6 frames a second for 20 secs on a canon 5D mk3 is ridiculous and outside the specification of the camera (your confetti example). So you'll shoot 120 images plus on that one shot alone?
The 5D mk3 has an 18 shot buffer for raw, so you're way outside your demanded performance.
 
Top