CF Cards Question

[parrotmomma]

A couple of questions:

Is it better to use many smaller cards or a few bigger ones?

What size and any particular brand? (within a reasonable price)

I have a 16 gb Kingston, and it's been fine. Is that a reliable brand?

They are for a Canon 50d. I don't regularly shoot multiple frames per second, so they don't have to be super-fast, but I don't want them slow as molasses either. I do always shoot RAW/jpeg.

[jscowsert]

In the 10 years that I have used CF's, I've never had a card failure with Kingston or SanDisk.

[Tom]

Lots of little cards vs few bigger cards is an age-old debate like Canon vs Nikon.

Why do you shoot RAW+JPEG? I almost never see any use for that. Just kills your buffer and takes up space.

Personally, I use Transcend 400X cards and most of mine are 16GIG.

[parrotmomma]

Thanks Jim, Nice to hear that about Kingston. I'll probably get a couple more of them. I did have two, but unfortunately one met it's demise when it fell off the table and my chihuahua ate it.

Thomas, the reason I do both RAW and jpeg is because I never know when I'm going to take something that I might want to fiddle with later, and the jpegs are there for putting on Facebook. I freely admit, I am a Facebook junkie. But I don't have the time to convert RAWs to jpeg just to put them on FB, so I just keep the camera set to both. As far as the buffer, it's not a big deal because I seldom take photos of anything that moves, so I'm not in a hurry to take another. When I'm in Yellowstone this summer though, I'll just do RAW.

[darktiger]

I usually use sandisk or transcend... my new 600X 32GB transcend has performed admirable... it replaced my 16gb 60mb/s Sandisk extreme...

I know a lot of people say something about all your eggs in a basket type things, but I think 16 and 32gb cards are a good balance in that debate especially since there are 64 and 128gb CF cards :)

[ldelacruz]

The only card that has ever failed me is a Kingston 16gb. All my other cards are Sandisk and I have not had any issues. Also, I agree with having more of the smaller cards versus 1 larger one.

[parrotmomma]

Have any of you tried this adapter? I have lots of SD cards. I wonder how this would work?

Jobo SD/SDHC to Compact Flash Type II Adapter SE9108 B&H Photo

[labmansid]

As already mentioned, this question has been debated pretty much since the start of digital photography. Some will say don't keep all your shots on one big card in case it fails. Whenever I hear that I have to wonder if they are still using 128/256Mb cards. Technology marches on. I think the important thing is to try to stick with reliable brands regardless of size, and try out a newer card thoroughly before any important shoots to test for potential problems. A smaller card is just as likely to fail as a larger one, in my opinion. The only card I have had fail was a Ritek SD card, and I was able to RMA it back before it was too late. I got a different brand.
I do shoot a lot of pictures in one sitting at times. In fact, I recently shot over 1200 RAW pics in one half day shoot. I was with some other photgraphers at the time, and on more than one occasion one or the other would miss a few potential shots because their smaller card filled up and had to be changed out. My 64Gb Transcend still had plenty of room, and I just kept on shooting, never missed a beat all day. Of course, YMMV.
Just my .02 cents.

[kenw]

Originally Posted by parrotmomma

Have any of you tried this adapter? I have lots of SD cards. I wonder how this would work?

Jobo SD/SDHC to Compact Flash Type II Adapter SE9108 B&H Photo

I use one similar to that, have for a couple of years with 0 issues. BTW, they're $19.99 at Fry's. Some of the comments indicate fit issues on some cameras but the only place I've had fit issues is on CF card readers. The adapters work fine in my 10d and 50d.

[Dobick]

Let me say this on the debate of lots of little vs fewer big ones...

The most important thing to me would be how likely you are to misplace them. It has been my experience that cards fail, but with a lot less frequency than I am likely to lose/misplace a card, so for me, the fewer cards that I have to keep track of, the better I would be.

[venchka]

This thread might lend credence to the "spread them around" theory of card & file management.

http://www.texasphotoforum.com/forum...-any-hope.html

If I were going someplace special I think writing to multiple cards might be a good thing to do. Either in camera which my camera allows and/or swapping cards on a regular basis.

[r0xikat]

I've had my Sandisk 8GB fail on me a few times.. but luckily didn't lose any data. I have 3 cheap (slower write times) 8GBs just so I don't have them all in one basket. if you shoot RAW, bigger faster cards are better if you can afford them. write speed makes a difference if you're shooting constantly.

[Jim Victory]

Originally Posted by venchka

This thread might lend credence to the "spread them around" theory of card & file management.

If I were going someplace special I think writing to multiple cards might be a good thing to do. Either in camera which my camera allows and/or swapping cards on a regular basis.

Thats why I carry a PSD in the field so I can periodically download files from my card to the device thus giving me a backup. Its nice if you also have a two card slot in your camera for duplicates on important stuff.

[cajunautoxer]

This seems like a pretty good deal

ILXCF16GB2P3 Lexar 16GB, 200x Platinum II High Speed Series, Compact Flash Memory Card - PACK OF 3 & ADORAMA TRI-FOLD MEMORY CARD WALLET

[parrotmomma]

Just an update: I bought one of those SD to CF adapters and took it for a spin today. It worked great as far as image quality, but, OMG is it S-L-O-W!! I used an 8 gb, class 6 card, I'd take a couple pics, walk back to my Jeep, climb inside, buckle up, and look at the camera, and it was still writing onto the card! I rarely, if ever, need real speed, so it isn't that big of a deal, but I'm just kind of impressed at how fast CF cards are.