Why are the older SanDisk Extreme CF memory cards (UDMA 60MB/s) cheaper than the newer UDMA7 120MB/s?
1370718
Read and download times are twice as fast on the new cards. That's only important if you are a professionalPhotographer downloading hundreds of images, or you shoot a lot of high speed sequence shots...like sports action. Orherwise save the money without losing capacity,
1370719
The newer cards are twice as fast but it isn't important for most amateurs unless you do extremely fast sports, etc.
1370720
Read and download times are twice as fast on the new cards. That's only important if you are a professional Photographer downloading hundreds of images, or you shoot a lot of high speed sequence shots...like sports action. Orherwise save the money without losing capacity,
1370721
It's my understanding the newer cards are faster, and can "write" the information quicker, which makes waiting time between shots shorter. Also, the older cards may not be able to write video fast enough, so if you use your camera for video the newer, faster cards are better. When comparing cards with the same GB storage capacity, and you don't need the extra speed, such as shooting in bursts, video, etc. then the older cards are fine, and save some money.
9500
I'm not sure, but this is the one I use "SanDisk 32 GB Class 4 SDHC Flash Memory Card SDSDB-032G-AFFP". I just looked at the one you listed and it looks the same, but I don't know what is the difference between them. The "SanDisk 32 GB Class 4 SDHC Flash Memory Card SDSDB-032G-AFFP" is about $3.00 less.
88913
I use my 4GB as a jumpdrive all the time, even though i carry it in my camera for pictures too. I contacted Sandisk directly on getting more. They said that they had no plans to produce any more of this design. Sad. A 64GB, Class 10 speed or higher, and USB3 version would be rockstar!BTW - You can also get OCZ versions of 1GB or 2GB: http://www.ocztechnology.com/ocz-secure-digital-dual-memory-cards-eol.htmlOr vintage A-DATA 2GB "SD DUO: versions here: http://www.dhgate.com/data-speedy-2gb-sd-duo-sd-usb-memory-card/p-ff808081300cd7a901301bce1cbc7
960420
In my 5D MK3 I use 32GB UDMA 7 Compact Flash and 32GB SDHC. There are slots for both, and a control option to choose which drive you wish to write to. CF has the faster transfer rate.
60758
I had the same question so I spoke with a Canon rep today. He recommended SanDisk but noted that the sd780is only writes up to 18-19 MB/sec. So it's essentially a waste of money to purchase a card that writes any faster than 20 MB/sec. Check this one out: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0018M256G/ref=cm_cd_asin_lnk However, faster cards are likely to write and read faster through a card reader or on your computer.
1572181
I have a 16gb, 45mb/s SanDisk. The speed is what I found works best for this camera when you are shooting RAW. As to the size, I think you can safely go up to whatever your budget supports. I myself would rather have a couple cards in case one fails as compared to one huge capacity one.
1488739
See my review and you will understand. Sandisk is rebranding the card. The extreme now has the specs of the extreme plus. I got the extreme and it has the specs of 80 mb per sec.
9502
I bought a SanDisk Extreme Pro 95MB/s 10 SDHC1 8GB memory card to use with it, but the regular one like you listed is the other type that I use. Either works well, although I like the higher end one for quality. This camera is more expensive, but very excellent.
2189593
Mine works perfectly since switching to a faster SANDISK card. When I used other (cheaper) grades of not so FAST memory cards, I experienced problems such as missing recordings during a stretch of driving. All went away with the SANDISK Ultra line of memory cards.
636124
I was told to use this card to keep up speed of clicks between pics and better videoSan Disk Extreme III SDHC 8 GB card (just bought the $31 + $5 shipping one from blue proton but it's now like $38 - same one I just bought (I think) at Circuit city was $79.
2175754
Check out Adorama's website. They're selling packs of two 16Gb Extreme cards (60MB/s) for $125. Slightly cheaper than what they sell them for here. The difference between the newer Extreme and the older Extreme IV is manufacturing cost. Since the IV was made, the technology has gotten better and cheaper, which is reflected in the current prices. The Extreme is better than the Extreme IV.
831206
They both work great as memory card to record stuff, but the difference is in the transfer speed that files can be written into or read from the card. So a 80MB/s would allow you to read/write faster compared to a 45MB/s, on the condition that your devices also support such speed. Higher speed cards cost more, and are usually needed for recording high definition videos or high frame rate videos.
485191
SanDisk Extreme 16GB SDHC UHS-1 Flash Memory Card Speed Up To 45MB/s, Frustration-Free Packaging- SDSDX-016G-AFFP --That's what I ordered and use. A card with 8GB storage will work fine too. by SanDisk
1471440
Joe, I don't know the answer and I'm in Italy with a dongle internet connectionthat cuts out faster than I can google. I would look at SanDisk's own website and see the writing speed (and secondly the reading speed).They seem priced the same, and Amazon's spekc are sketchy.
2030172
I got this one on amazon. Has been working fine with no issues for several months now:SanDisk Ultra 32GB MicroSDHC Class 10 UHS Memory Card Speed Up To 30MB/s With Adapter, Frustration-Free Packaging - SDSDQU-032G-AFFP-A [Old Version]
2183992
Yes, they are fully backward compatible. I have an old Nikon F5 which I use the newer UDMA7 card in with no issue. The newer designation (7) is just the version which relates to the transfer speed of a maximum of 167mb/sec vs. 133mb/sec for version 6. I don't know about Canon specifically, but they work fine with my Nikon - given the popularity of Canon and their electronics, I can't imagine there will be issues. Hope this helps!
2189422
Thanks; I'd missed that comment in the dpreview review. Seems to contradict what I found at kenrockwell.com/tech/cf-sd.htm -- basically, that a faster card matters for downloading (e.g. camera to computer) but not in modern cameras unless you overflow their internal buffer memory. Ken's description sounds like picture-taking speed won't be inhibited with a slower card because of the camera's buffer, which is what I care about most. Slower playback and downloading is fine. In other words, write speed is more important to me than read speed and apparently the camera's buffer effectively compensates for slower cards when writing to them. Thanks; I'd missed that comment in the dpreview review. Seems to contradict what I found at kenrockwell.com/tech/cf-sd.htm -- basically, that a faster card matters for downloading (e.g. camera to computer) but not in modern cameras unless you overflow their internal buffer memory. Ken's description sounds like picture-taking speed won't be inhibited with a slower card because of the camera's buffer, which is what I care about most. Slower playback and downloading is fine. In other words, write speed is more important to me than read speed and apparently the camera's buffer effectively... » Read More Thanks; I'd missed that comment in the dpreview review. Seems to contradict what I found at kenrockwell.com/tech/cf-sd.htm -- basically, that a faster card matters for downloading (e.g. camera to computer) but not in modern cameras unless you overflow their internal buffer memory. Ken's description sounds like picture-taking speed won't be inhibited with a slower card because of the camera's buffer, which is what I care about most. Slower playback and downloading is fine. In other words, write speed is more important to me than read speed and apparently the camera's buffer effectively compensates for slower cards when writing to them. « Show Less