CF Cards - is the X speed really indicative? - Transcend 45x vs Ridata 52x

[vince123123]

ANyone happens to know what is the best value ofr money and fastest write CF card now? from what i see, its either the trasncend 45x or the ridata 52x. but is the ridata necessarily faster? from the current prices, it even appears that the ridata may be cheaper than the transcend.

anyone knows the "best" brand/model of CF cards at the moment? (pls no lexars)

 

[oeyvind]

IMHO it makes little diff, unless you are using bodies like 1D or D2H

 

[forbytes]

you may want to take a look at a comparision done by dpreview

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0310/03102102biggestcfs.asp

Hope it clears some doubts with regards to the 'x' factor. ;p

 

[vince123123]

looks like hte new sandisk cards are quite good, comaprd to their old slower versions. anyone knows the mkt price for those now?

you may want to take a look at a comparision done by dpreview

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0310/03102102biggestcfs.asp

Hope it clears some doubts with regards to the 'x' factor. ;p

 

[oeyvind]

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007

 

[romeobravo]

to me, it does not make any difference unless you are one of those pro sport photographers who very often need to use 9fps feature

 

[vince123123]

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007

that database has no info on ridata 52x

 

[oeyvind]

that database has no info on ridata 52x

like what romeobravo have written... it makes very very little or no difference unless you using a pro body like 1D, or D2H.

 

[defn]

IMHO it makes little diff, unless you are using bodies like 1D or D2H

I agree...

neeway I'm NEVER going back to sandisk after that horrible experience they gave me with a 256MB CF Card and my PPC...

 

[Watcher]

like what romeobravo have written... it makes very very little or no difference unless you using a pro body like 1D, or D2H.

Actually, not quite accurate. For Canon bodies, yes. But for Nikon, even D100 has significant difference. Look at the database for yourself. From the high speed, the smaller buffer on D100 makes much less significance than the 10Ds' large buffer which is needed to compensate for the slow writes.

 

[vince123123]

whats wrong with sandisk?
seems like htey are the 'fastest' card rite now.

I agree...

neeway I'm NEVER going back to sandisk after that horrible experience they gave me with a 256MB CF Card and my PPC...

 

[vince123123]

well im using a d100 and it will make a difference as a small buffer means large benefit with faster cards so the buffer can empty more quickly.

from the cf dtabase, it also appears that diff cards will make a difference/

to me, it does not make any difference unless you are one of those pro sport photographers who very often need to use 9fps feature

 

[mpenza]

btw, if I'm not wrong, the write speed for the RiData is 40x, while that of the Transcend is 45x. The 52x speed applies only to the read speed of the Ridata.

 

[defn]

whats wrong with sandisk?
seems like htey are the 'fastest' card rite now.

I don't think u can tell much of a difference with a digital camera. Try loading a sandisk 256MB card full of PPC software and you'll find that it takes several minutes to "settle down"... PPC users shd know what i mean.

 

[mpenza]

you could tell a difference with a fast camera. a slow memory card will really affect your phototaking experience.

 

[defn]

you could tell a difference with a fast camera. a slow memory card will really affect your phototaking experience.

paiseh im using a cheap camera...