Wags 0 #1 September 29, 2003 Well here goes, these are the results of my somewhat controlled tests with my Digital Rebel. I used a tripod, a light, and a remote switch with a lock to do continuous shots, and keep them at a consistent file size. I shot the photos at a frame rate of 320 so the shutter speed would not effect the cycle time of the test. I found on other threads that people were getting file sizes of about 2MB on there skydiving pictures I averaged about 2.15MB per picture. Keep in mind that different "scenes" will have larger file sizes, therefore effecting parts of these results. I have 2 different memory cards, a 256MB Lexar 12x card ($90), and I think the newest card on the marked, a 512MB SanDisk Extreme ($190)(came with a memory card holder pouch, and a small cd with Rescue Pro, a data recovery program that works on any memory card). I think this card is rated at 40x. It comes out at the top on the tests on this memory card review site. http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007-6111 First the good stuff, here is the number of shots I got with each card. In 30 seconds with the 12x card: 17 shots. In 30 seconds with the Extreme card: 18 shots In 60 seconds with the 12x card: 26 shots In 60 seconds with the Extreme card: 28 shots The 12x card took 25 seconds to completely clear the buffer after shooting. The Extreme took 20 seconds. Someone posted on an earlier thread that the rebel didn't gain much with a faster card, It seems they are correct. Considering the speed of the camera is the one thing I would like to change, I think I can live with these numbers. I have yet to get this thing out in freefall, and test it in the real world, so until then, these numbers are the best I can do. If anyone has some real world numbers, I would like to hear them. Also I would like to hear what people are getting for file sizes in different situations, as that will also affect the speed. Now the other tests. To dump the images to my laptop using my SanDisk PCMCIA Compact Flash reader ($13). The 12x card sent 40 pictures in 65 seconds. The Extreme sent 40 pictures in 60 seconds. To dump the images to my laptop using the USB adaptor with the card in the camera. The 12x card and the Extreme both dumped only 10 pictures in 2 minuets 15 seconds. This should tell you that if you want to keep your sanity, you must find a faster way to get the pictures in your computer then the supplied USB cable. If you have 100 pictures to dump, it will take you over 22 min. with USB, and only 2.5 min with the PCMCIA card. If you have a firewire port on your computer, you will be best off getting a card reader that uses it, although it will cost you a little more. The PCMCIA adapter is fast, simple, and cheep. The place where the cards differed the most was deleting files. The Extreme was about 3 to 5 times faster then the 12x, but we're talking seconds here. I am just including this since I took the time to test it. To delete 40 pictures on the 12x card in the camera it took 12 seconds. To delete 40 pictures on the Extreme in the camera it took 4 seconds. To delete 40 pictures on the 12x card in the PCMCIA adapter, in the laptop, it took 5 seconds. To delete 40 pictures on the Extreme in the PCMCIA adapter, in the laptop, it took 1 second. Again small numbers of seconds, but if you are deleting 200 pictures, the cards will take 25 seconds, and 5 seconds. Well, that's all I have for now, I love this camera, as it is actually getting me interested in photography. I have taken stunning shots of the falls here in town, and some of the backyard creatures. The feedback it gives you on a picture you have taken is awesome, but that's for another post. I hope this info helps some of you to make a better educated decision on whether or not the Rebel is for you. Blue Skies, Wags Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deuce 1 #2 September 29, 2003 Very nice and helpful review, Wags. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diverds 0 #3 September 29, 2003 Hey Mark, How's things in SD? Did you get the kit or just the rebel body? What lense are you using? Skydive Radio Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wags 0 #4 September 29, 2003 Hi Dave, It's colder then crap up here, did 3 tandems Sunday starting at 8:00 am. Less then 20 deg. at altitude. Burrrr..... Yes, I bought the kit with the lens, and also bought a Tamron 70-300mm lens for other shooting. I plan on using the included 18-55mm lens on my helmet. I just need to get the tandem rig off my back. The software that comes with the camera is cool too. The Zoom browser program will give you every bit of info about your picture you can imagine, it even tells you what lens you used, and what mm zoom it was set at. And of course all the other settings, shutter speed, aperture setting, shooting mode, metering mode, exposure compensation, ISO speed, Image size, Image quality, Flash on or off, white balance setting, parameters ( contrast, sharpness, color saturation, color tone ), color space (RGB, Adobe), file size, drive mode (single shot, continuous, or timer). All this information will only help us to see what makes a better picture, so we can improve our next shots. The camera itself will give you the basic info, and a histogram, and if any part of your picture is overexposed it will flash, so you can try different settings, and shoot again. This doesn't help in freefall, but you can adjust for the next jump. Blue Skies, Wags Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fasterfaller 0 #5 September 29, 2003 FYI sandisck now has a card that is much faster than the extreme card with a write speed of 10mb per second and a read speed of 11mbs . I just got done testing the sandisk and it smoked the Lexar wa 40x and the Transcend 45x card . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wags 0 #6 September 29, 2003 Awesome, I wonder if it'll make a difference in the Digital Rebel. It didn't seem to gain more then 1 or 2 shots in a 30-60 sec. time frame going from 12x to 40x, But every picture counts. Do you have a Digital Rebel? If so it would be cool to see what you can get with the same testing parameters I used. which card are you referring to? Is it the Ultra II? If so, according to the review site I referenced above, it's about the same speed or a little slower then the Extreme. Blue Skies, Wags Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fasterfaller 0 #7 September 29, 2003 The ultra II is a lot faster than the extreme . I shoot the 1d , 10d , and the 1ds and the speed improvements really show when you shoot raw mode which is the only way I shoot . I have tried every card out ther and the best I have found are the Transcend 45x , the lexar 40x wa and the sandisk 60x . Try doing the same test ONLY shooting in the raw maode and that will give you a good idea what the cards can do . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vdschoor 0 #8 October 1, 2003 QuoteThe ultra II is a lot faster than the extreme . I shoot the 1d , 10d , and the 1ds and the speed improvements really show when you shoot raw mode which is the only way I shoot . I have tried every card out ther and the best I have found are the Transcend 45x , the lexar 40x wa and the sandisk 60x . Try doing the same test ONLY shooting in the raw maode and that will give you a good idea what the cards can do . I just ordered the 512Mb Sandisk ULTRA II card. Last night I played around with my Digital Rebel and took pictures for 60 seconds. With my "cheapest I could find" 128 Mb CF card I have for my Digital Elph I could take about 27 pictures in Large format. I will post my results as soon as I get the Sandisk Ultra II card in. Overall I am really happy with it, my tongueswitch works, my Sigma 15mm works.. Now I only have to mount it and jump it! Iwan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wags 0 #9 October 1, 2003 Iwan, sounds great, if you do some tests, it would be great if you could try to make the pictures around the 2MB size to keep the tests consistent with mine. I am going to try to do the tests again using fastfaller's advise, and using the raw mode. I will also do them again just for fun using the medium fine (2.8 Mega Pixel) setting. If you find that card works much faster with the Rebel, there will be an Extreme card for sale soon. Blue Skies, Wags Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
monkeyKam 0 #10 October 2, 2003 Hey Wags, FWIW, when I bought my D60 over a year ago, I spent quite a while on the phone with a Canon tech talking about what memory cards I should by (16X, "pro," etc.). He said that the bus in the camera does not move data any faster than a standard speed memory card. If you put a 24x card in there, the camera can still only move data to it at a fixed rate. He told me not to waste money on an ultra-high speed card unless I was getting impatient while downloading to the computer. In a year of experience with the digital setup, I've found this to work best (and with reasonable cost) for me: I work with 2 standard Sandisk 128 MB cards, swapping them in between loads, using one to take pictures while the other copies to the hard drive on the laptop. 128 MB seems to be perfect, since I've ever been able to fire off more than the max capacity of 49 large JPEGs in the time it takes to go through freefall from 13,500. Seriously, do you really need 49 images of a 65 second skydive? That's what *motion pictures* are for. Anyway, my 2 cents. Er, maybe 1.5 cents. I saved some money with the standard cards. Happy digiShooting! Andy http://www.monkeykam.tv - freefall images so digital you can smell 'em! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vdschoor 0 #11 October 2, 2003 Quote In a year of experience with the digital setup, I've found this to work best (and with reasonable cost) for me: I work with 2 standard Sandisk 128 MB cards, swapping them in between loads, using one to take pictures while the other copies to the hard drive on the laptop. 128 MB seems to be perfect, since I've ever been able to fire off more than the max capacity of 49 large JPEGs in the time it takes to go through freefall from 13,500. Seriously, do you really need 49 images of a 65 second skydive? That's what *motion pictures* are for. Quote I agree, but still, you want the "umph" to be there if you need it right? It's not really about wanting to take a pic of every second in freefall, but if there is a moment where you want to shoot a bunch, you want the camera to be ready... So what speed do you use, do you use the normal "consumer" compact flash? How big can you blow up those Large jpegs? Iwan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Wags 0 #12 October 2, 2003 Andy, I agree with what they told you, to a point. The tests I have done, have shown a slight difference in the cards, obviously VERY slight. Most defiantly not worth paying more money for a better card, if it will only get you one extra picture per jump. But........if that extra picture is the magic shot, then maybe it is. What I have found, is that the newer faster cards cost very little more then the slower ones. And I am a bit "tweaky", and like the faster time to delete pictures. My upload times to the computer didn't seem to change much with the different cards, but changed drastically with the method I used to up load them. What type of card reader do you use? I see you have a much faster camera then the Rebel, and if I had a camera as fast as yours, I wouldn't be trying to do everything I can to get an extra shot or two, within reason.($) Now on to phase 2, RAW, and lower resolution tests. I will try to make this short. Keep in mind that no matter what resolution you use, it takes the first 4 frames in about 2 seconds, then it will slow to the speed of the second buffer ( that depends on file size), then it waits for a picture to be saved to the card before taking each additional picture ( Three steps of gradually slowing down.) On the first tests I did, I forgot to mention that the camera took the first 11 shots in 8 seconds in the large fine mode. That's when the second buffer was full. I will add this spec to the following tests. RAW mode, approximately 5.5MB file size: Shots / time to fill second buffer: 6 shots in 6 seconds. In 30 seconds with the 12x card: 9 shots. In 30 seconds with the Extreme : 9 shots. Yes, it took 24 seconds to take the last 3 shots. In 60 seconds with the 12x card: 12 shots. In 60 seconds with the Extreme: 13 shots. Medium fine mode. This is a 2.8 Mega Pixel picture, approximately 1.25MB file size: Shots / time to fill second buffer: 16 shots in 14 seconds. In 30 seconds with the 12x card: 22 shots. In 30 seconds with the Extreme : 23 shots. In 60 seconds with the 12x card: 33 shots. In 60 seconds with the Extreme: 35 shots. Small fine mode. This is a 1.6 Mega Pixel picture, approximately 860k file size. Please don't use this in a skydive. I wasn't going to test this mode, but I was on a roll. Shots / time to fill second buffer: 22 shots in 19 seconds. In 30 seconds with the 12x card: 26 shots. In 30 seconds with the Extreme : 27 shots. In 60 seconds with the 12x card: 39 shots. In 60 seconds with the Extreme: 41 shots. There you have it, the two cards I have make almost no difference, but of course the shooting resolution does. Blue Skies, Wags Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites vdschoor 0 #13 October 2, 2003 http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/page10.asp This url (posted in another thread as well) has a good test around different CF cards, with different settings for file size. Iwan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Wags 0 #14 October 2, 2003 Iwan, that review has a great explanation of the buffers. Now I understand why when I "pretend" to be shooting a tandem, I am able to take shots for a full 30 seconds ( at a speed that I think I will take them ), and still be able to take a 4 shot burst at the end. The fast emptying of the 1st buffer, will allow for some great opening shots. Blue Skies, Wags Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites vdschoor 0 #15 October 2, 2003 QuoteIwan, that review has a great explanation of the buffers. Now I understand why when I "pretend" to be shooting a tandem, I am able to take shots for a full 30 seconds ( at a speed that I think I will take them ), and still be able to take a 4 shot burst at the end. The fast emptying of the 1st buffer, will allow for some great opening shots. I found this review very helpful as well, what I tried last night is taking pictures (not holding down the trigger) one by one, and see how many I could get in in a minute. 40 / 41 pics with a normal SanDisk 128 MB CF card, nothing fancy. This was with my camera set to Large JPEG, not RAW. Performance when shooting RAW is a lot less, if I remember well it was somewhere around 26 pics. Iwan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Wags 0 #16 October 3, 2003 Iwan, do you know what the file size was on those large fine JPEG pictures? The file size makes a BIG impact on the speed after the buffers are full. I have seen anywhere from 1MB to well over 3MB in the larg fine mode. It depends on the complexity of the picture, and the camera settings. 26 in RAW mode?!?! Are you sure you're using a Rebel? Again, do you know the file size of the RAW pictures? Blue Skies, Wags Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites monkeyKam 0 #17 October 3, 2003 Yo Wags! Great points on all counts. Regarding the fast camera, I forgot there was a difference. You know, I can't figure myself out. I spent $2,095 on that silly D60 when that's what they were, bought all the extra crap for it, yet I'm concerned with maybe a $50 or $60 difference in memory cards. What the heel?! Anyway, the card reader in my laptop is the PCMCIA adapter that came with my Epson 785EPX printer. It is basically a simple converter from CF card pinouts to PCMCIA pinouts. It's nice, works well. On the desktop, I use a little Dazzle USB thingy. It works pretty well. The desktop has Windows 2000 (patched and up to date), but once in a great while, Windows will skip right past the Blue Screen of Death and goes right to starting the computer again. Fun. Happy shooting! Andy http://www.monkeykam.tv - freefall imagery so digital you can smell it! "I drank what?" --Sophocles Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites vdschoor 0 #18 October 3, 2003 QuoteIwan, do you know what the file size was on those large fine JPEG pictures? The file size makes a BIG impact on the speed after the buffers are full. I have seen anywhere from 1MB to well over 3MB in the larg fine mode. It depends on the complexity of the picture, and the camera settings. 26 in RAW mode?!?! Are you sure you're using a Rebel? Again, do you know the file size of the RAW pictures? I am sure I am using the Rebel, I also know I made a mistake here. I just did another test and I could take 12 (with my standard, cheapest I could find 128 MB CF card) and they had sizes between 6.5 and 7 MB. These are the numbers for pics in RAW mode. I just got an email my order for the Ultra II had shipped, with an estimated arrival of Monday, I will keep you posted. Iwan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites vdschoor 0 #19 October 7, 2003 Ok, here she goes. Some tests with the Ultra II card (512 MB) I can take between 42 and 47 pictures in 60 seconds, when my camera is set to large mode. When set to RAW format, I can take somewhere around 16. Use your judgement as to whether this is worth an additional 50 bucks for the memory card, it is not much faster than my standard 128 that I already had. I am going to keep this one though, since I wanted a bigger CF card anyways, but if I had to go and buy one for my Digital Rebel, I would go with a cheapo consumer CF card.... Iwan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Wags 0 #20 October 7, 2003 Wow Iwan, that's 60% more shots then I got, with either of my cards. Did you try to make the file sizes about 2MB? Do you know what size they were? Smaller file sizes is the ONLY reason lower resolution pictures can be taken faster. That's why it is so important to compare tests with the same size files. Blue Skies, Wags Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites vdschoor 0 #21 October 7, 2003 QuoteWow Iwan, that's 60% more shots then I got, with either of my cards. Did you try to make the file sizes about 2MB? Do you know what size they were? Smaller file sizes is the ONLY reason lower resolution pictures can be taken faster. That's why it is so important to compare tests with the same size files. I checked a couple of pics, and they were around 2.5 Mb, some a little more, some less, but none of them were 2 Mb though, they were all larger. I don't know what kind of CF card you have, but with my cheap Sandisk 128 Mb card, I could already take 40 pics in 60 seconds (large mode) Iwan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites psw097 0 #22 October 7, 2003 I did a similar test with my Digital Rebel and had almost the exact results. The 3 cards I used were a 256MB Lexar 40x WA, a 512MB SanDisk Extreme and an old 1997 30MB SanDisk I had around. I used Program AE, parameter 2. Left everything in auto from there. Used 60 seconds as the test time. Files sizes varied a little but were ~2.1MB in large/fine. Lexar 40x Raw 11 Large/fine 26 Med/fine 31 SanDisk extreme Raw 13 Large/fine 28 Medium/fine 34 Old SanDisk Medium/fine 28 (not enough capacity for other tests) The SanDisk Extreme did a little better than the Lexar but not much. Webster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites vdschoor 0 #23 October 8, 2003 QuoteI did a similar test with my Digital Rebel and had almost the exact results. The 3 cards I used were a 256MB Lexar 40x WA, a 512MB SanDisk Extreme and an old 1997 30MB SanDisk I had around. I used Program AE, parameter 2. Left everything in auto from there. Used 60 seconds as the test time. Files sizes varied a little but were ~2.1MB in large/fine. Lexar 40x Raw 11 Large/fine 26 Med/fine 31 SanDisk extreme Raw 13 Large/fine 28 Medium/fine 34 Old SanDisk Medium/fine 28 (not enough capacity for other tests) The SanDisk Extreme did a little better than the Lexar but not much. Webster My test was slightly different, my camera was set to manual, iso 200 , camera set at 500 / F8 ( what I would be using for skydiving) During the test I tried not to fill the buffer, which you probably did the whole time? If you go ahead and try to make about a picture a second for the whole 60 seconds, you'll get much better results. Iwan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites psw097 0 #24 October 8, 2003 I reproduced those setting. 1/500, F8, ISO200, large/fine, SanDisk Extreme 512MB CF card, manual mode, manual focus, parameter 2, 60 seconds time. 300D firmware 1.0.2. In continuous mode 27 shots In single mode 24 shots I tried this with the same settings but indoors - grossly underexposed. I was able to shoot in the 40s then but the files were unusable. I don't think I'll be able to squeeze any more shots out of my camera in 60 seconds. Webster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jose 0 #25 April 20, 2004 Ok, so after alot of reading on these cards, I "think" I am more informed, but at the same time, I feel more confused than ever. Here's the thing... I am getting the 300D for tandems and small freeflys. I would like to get a good quality card that I can use in another "higher" quality camera like the 10D. On B&H the Sandisk 512 Ultra II Compact is $119, and the Sandisk 512 Ultra Compact is $139. If the Ultra II is the newer card, why is it more expensive? And lastly, the feared question.......has there been a revelation of opinion on these cards which has led to one card being the best performing card? If so, which one is it? Thanks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Wags 0 #12 October 2, 2003 Andy, I agree with what they told you, to a point. The tests I have done, have shown a slight difference in the cards, obviously VERY slight. Most defiantly not worth paying more money for a better card, if it will only get you one extra picture per jump. But........if that extra picture is the magic shot, then maybe it is. What I have found, is that the newer faster cards cost very little more then the slower ones. And I am a bit "tweaky", and like the faster time to delete pictures. My upload times to the computer didn't seem to change much with the different cards, but changed drastically with the method I used to up load them. What type of card reader do you use? I see you have a much faster camera then the Rebel, and if I had a camera as fast as yours, I wouldn't be trying to do everything I can to get an extra shot or two, within reason.($) Now on to phase 2, RAW, and lower resolution tests. I will try to make this short. Keep in mind that no matter what resolution you use, it takes the first 4 frames in about 2 seconds, then it will slow to the speed of the second buffer ( that depends on file size), then it waits for a picture to be saved to the card before taking each additional picture ( Three steps of gradually slowing down.) On the first tests I did, I forgot to mention that the camera took the first 11 shots in 8 seconds in the large fine mode. That's when the second buffer was full. I will add this spec to the following tests. RAW mode, approximately 5.5MB file size: Shots / time to fill second buffer: 6 shots in 6 seconds. In 30 seconds with the 12x card: 9 shots. In 30 seconds with the Extreme : 9 shots. Yes, it took 24 seconds to take the last 3 shots. In 60 seconds with the 12x card: 12 shots. In 60 seconds with the Extreme: 13 shots. Medium fine mode. This is a 2.8 Mega Pixel picture, approximately 1.25MB file size: Shots / time to fill second buffer: 16 shots in 14 seconds. In 30 seconds with the 12x card: 22 shots. In 30 seconds with the Extreme : 23 shots. In 60 seconds with the 12x card: 33 shots. In 60 seconds with the Extreme: 35 shots. Small fine mode. This is a 1.6 Mega Pixel picture, approximately 860k file size. Please don't use this in a skydive. I wasn't going to test this mode, but I was on a roll. Shots / time to fill second buffer: 22 shots in 19 seconds. In 30 seconds with the 12x card: 26 shots. In 30 seconds with the Extreme : 27 shots. In 60 seconds with the 12x card: 39 shots. In 60 seconds with the Extreme: 41 shots. There you have it, the two cards I have make almost no difference, but of course the shooting resolution does. Blue Skies, Wags Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vdschoor 0 #13 October 2, 2003 http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/page10.asp This url (posted in another thread as well) has a good test around different CF cards, with different settings for file size. Iwan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wags 0 #14 October 2, 2003 Iwan, that review has a great explanation of the buffers. Now I understand why when I "pretend" to be shooting a tandem, I am able to take shots for a full 30 seconds ( at a speed that I think I will take them ), and still be able to take a 4 shot burst at the end. The fast emptying of the 1st buffer, will allow for some great opening shots. Blue Skies, Wags Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vdschoor 0 #15 October 2, 2003 QuoteIwan, that review has a great explanation of the buffers. Now I understand why when I "pretend" to be shooting a tandem, I am able to take shots for a full 30 seconds ( at a speed that I think I will take them ), and still be able to take a 4 shot burst at the end. The fast emptying of the 1st buffer, will allow for some great opening shots. I found this review very helpful as well, what I tried last night is taking pictures (not holding down the trigger) one by one, and see how many I could get in in a minute. 40 / 41 pics with a normal SanDisk 128 MB CF card, nothing fancy. This was with my camera set to Large JPEG, not RAW. Performance when shooting RAW is a lot less, if I remember well it was somewhere around 26 pics. Iwan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wags 0 #16 October 3, 2003 Iwan, do you know what the file size was on those large fine JPEG pictures? The file size makes a BIG impact on the speed after the buffers are full. I have seen anywhere from 1MB to well over 3MB in the larg fine mode. It depends on the complexity of the picture, and the camera settings. 26 in RAW mode?!?! Are you sure you're using a Rebel? Again, do you know the file size of the RAW pictures? Blue Skies, Wags Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
monkeyKam 0 #17 October 3, 2003 Yo Wags! Great points on all counts. Regarding the fast camera, I forgot there was a difference. You know, I can't figure myself out. I spent $2,095 on that silly D60 when that's what they were, bought all the extra crap for it, yet I'm concerned with maybe a $50 or $60 difference in memory cards. What the heel?! Anyway, the card reader in my laptop is the PCMCIA adapter that came with my Epson 785EPX printer. It is basically a simple converter from CF card pinouts to PCMCIA pinouts. It's nice, works well. On the desktop, I use a little Dazzle USB thingy. It works pretty well. The desktop has Windows 2000 (patched and up to date), but once in a great while, Windows will skip right past the Blue Screen of Death and goes right to starting the computer again. Fun. Happy shooting! Andy http://www.monkeykam.tv - freefall imagery so digital you can smell it! "I drank what?" --Sophocles Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vdschoor 0 #18 October 3, 2003 QuoteIwan, do you know what the file size was on those large fine JPEG pictures? The file size makes a BIG impact on the speed after the buffers are full. I have seen anywhere from 1MB to well over 3MB in the larg fine mode. It depends on the complexity of the picture, and the camera settings. 26 in RAW mode?!?! Are you sure you're using a Rebel? Again, do you know the file size of the RAW pictures? I am sure I am using the Rebel, I also know I made a mistake here. I just did another test and I could take 12 (with my standard, cheapest I could find 128 MB CF card) and they had sizes between 6.5 and 7 MB. These are the numbers for pics in RAW mode. I just got an email my order for the Ultra II had shipped, with an estimated arrival of Monday, I will keep you posted. Iwan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vdschoor 0 #19 October 7, 2003 Ok, here she goes. Some tests with the Ultra II card (512 MB) I can take between 42 and 47 pictures in 60 seconds, when my camera is set to large mode. When set to RAW format, I can take somewhere around 16. Use your judgement as to whether this is worth an additional 50 bucks for the memory card, it is not much faster than my standard 128 that I already had. I am going to keep this one though, since I wanted a bigger CF card anyways, but if I had to go and buy one for my Digital Rebel, I would go with a cheapo consumer CF card.... Iwan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wags 0 #20 October 7, 2003 Wow Iwan, that's 60% more shots then I got, with either of my cards. Did you try to make the file sizes about 2MB? Do you know what size they were? Smaller file sizes is the ONLY reason lower resolution pictures can be taken faster. That's why it is so important to compare tests with the same size files. Blue Skies, Wags Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vdschoor 0 #21 October 7, 2003 QuoteWow Iwan, that's 60% more shots then I got, with either of my cards. Did you try to make the file sizes about 2MB? Do you know what size they were? Smaller file sizes is the ONLY reason lower resolution pictures can be taken faster. That's why it is so important to compare tests with the same size files. I checked a couple of pics, and they were around 2.5 Mb, some a little more, some less, but none of them were 2 Mb though, they were all larger. I don't know what kind of CF card you have, but with my cheap Sandisk 128 Mb card, I could already take 40 pics in 60 seconds (large mode) Iwan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
psw097 0 #22 October 7, 2003 I did a similar test with my Digital Rebel and had almost the exact results. The 3 cards I used were a 256MB Lexar 40x WA, a 512MB SanDisk Extreme and an old 1997 30MB SanDisk I had around. I used Program AE, parameter 2. Left everything in auto from there. Used 60 seconds as the test time. Files sizes varied a little but were ~2.1MB in large/fine. Lexar 40x Raw 11 Large/fine 26 Med/fine 31 SanDisk extreme Raw 13 Large/fine 28 Medium/fine 34 Old SanDisk Medium/fine 28 (not enough capacity for other tests) The SanDisk Extreme did a little better than the Lexar but not much. Webster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vdschoor 0 #23 October 8, 2003 QuoteI did a similar test with my Digital Rebel and had almost the exact results. The 3 cards I used were a 256MB Lexar 40x WA, a 512MB SanDisk Extreme and an old 1997 30MB SanDisk I had around. I used Program AE, parameter 2. Left everything in auto from there. Used 60 seconds as the test time. Files sizes varied a little but were ~2.1MB in large/fine. Lexar 40x Raw 11 Large/fine 26 Med/fine 31 SanDisk extreme Raw 13 Large/fine 28 Medium/fine 34 Old SanDisk Medium/fine 28 (not enough capacity for other tests) The SanDisk Extreme did a little better than the Lexar but not much. Webster My test was slightly different, my camera was set to manual, iso 200 , camera set at 500 / F8 ( what I would be using for skydiving) During the test I tried not to fill the buffer, which you probably did the whole time? If you go ahead and try to make about a picture a second for the whole 60 seconds, you'll get much better results. Iwan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
psw097 0 #24 October 8, 2003 I reproduced those setting. 1/500, F8, ISO200, large/fine, SanDisk Extreme 512MB CF card, manual mode, manual focus, parameter 2, 60 seconds time. 300D firmware 1.0.2. In continuous mode 27 shots In single mode 24 shots I tried this with the same settings but indoors - grossly underexposed. I was able to shoot in the 40s then but the files were unusable. I don't think I'll be able to squeeze any more shots out of my camera in 60 seconds. Webster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jose 0 #25 April 20, 2004 Ok, so after alot of reading on these cards, I "think" I am more informed, but at the same time, I feel more confused than ever. Here's the thing... I am getting the 300D for tandems and small freeflys. I would like to get a good quality card that I can use in another "higher" quality camera like the 10D. On B&H the Sandisk 512 Ultra II Compact is $119, and the Sandisk 512 Ultra Compact is $139. If the Ultra II is the newer card, why is it more expensive? And lastly, the feared question.......has there been a revelation of opinion on these cards which has led to one card being the best performing card? If so, which one is it? Thanks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
