SD Cards: I was just wondering which would be better. sd cards or micro sd cards in an adapter?

Dan S Loc: Adair Village, Oregon

I was just wondering which would be better. sd cards or micro sd cards in an adapter?

rwm283main Loc: Terryville, CT

I would stick with the SD card. The adapter with the micro card installed might be a bit too tall for the memory slot door to close properly plus now you have two contact points to deal with.
They have the new SD Extreme cards that are considerably faster, especially for video recording.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

I have four SD cards and four micros in adapters.
I never had a problem with the micros in adapters after a couple of years.

The micros with adapters were on sale at the time, cheaper than the full size cards.

Your choice. I wouldn't worry.

{
And the contacts are gold plated, they don't tarnish.
The adapter is straight through, no electronics, no delays.
No problem fitting in the camera.
}

Dan S Loc: Adair Village, Oregon

I've used micros before and the size didn't seem to matter. I was thinking more like sd cards only have 1 set of contacts, where micros have the contacts from the sd card to the adapter and then the adapter to the camera. Wasn't sure if the extra contacts might slow the card down just slightly or affect the image quality also only slightly.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Dan S wrote:

I've used micros before and the size didn't seem to matter. I was thinking more like sd cards only have 1 set of contacts, where micros have the contacts from the sd card to the adapter and then the adapter to the camera. Wasn't sure if the extra contacts might slow the card down just slightly or affect the image quality also only slightly.

Signals travel at about 1 nanosecond per foot, or about 83 picoseconds per inch.
Neither you nor the camera will notice the extra 1/2 to 3/4 inch of wire in the adapter.
Contacts won't slow down the signal.

Dan S Loc: Adair Village, Oregon

Ok, thank you very much. The reason I ask is my cards are all getting pretty old and want to update, was thinking going with micro so I could use them in more devices than just my camera, but really the only other device I would use them in would be my phone, and I already have one in there and don't have a reason to swap it out. So, probably just go with sd's.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Dan S wrote:

Ok, thank you very much. The reason I ask is my cards are all getting pretty old and want to update, was thinking going with micro so I could use them in more devices than just my camera, but really the only other device I would use them in would be my phone, and I already have one in there and don't have a reason to swap it out. So, probably just go with sd's.

That's also what I did. My old phone used a micro. I don't remember if out tablet does.
Don't worry too much about the cards getting "old", some of my SD cards are going on 14 years.
But they are not normally used every day.

The number of lifetime writes they can have are per memory cell not "writes to the card".

User ID

Longshadow wrote:

I have four SD cards and four micros in adapters.
I never had a problem with the micros in adapters after a couple of years.

The micros with adapters were on sale at the time, cheaper than the full size cards.

Your choice. I wouldn't worry.

{
And the contacts are gold plated, they don't tarnish.
The adapter is straight through, no electronics, no delays.
No problem fitting in the camera.
}

I have video project idea that will most likely involve more frequent removal and exchange of the memory cards. Therefor I will definitely go with micro SD cards. I can extract micros directly from the adapter without ejecting the adapter. This eliminates beating up the card latching and ejection mechanism.

Hawgsters are rather fearful of adapters for both cards and lenses. Makes for great multi page arguments and lengthy pontification in the Great UHH Sacred Tradition.

24Megapixseal Loc: Kansas

I use both, without worry... Good to read that others feel the same!
Memory is sooo cheap these days.

User ID

24Megapixseal wrote:

I use both, without worry... Good to read that others feel the same!
Memory is sooo cheap these days.

Right now Im shopping for a fast 256 or 512 and prices are ~$150 to over double that $$. Cheap for some folks ... other than myself.

Capn_Dave

rwm283main wrote:

I would stick with the SD card. The adapter with the micro card installed might be a bit too tall for the memory slot door to close properly plus now you have two contact points to deal with.
They have the new SD Extreme cards that are considerably faster, especially for video recording.

I have o idea what demission you are referring to as being too tall. I measured a card with the adapter and it is exactly the same size

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Capn_Dave wrote:

I have o idea what demission you are referring to as being too tall. I measured a card with the adapter and it is exactly the same size

Amazing how they took size into consideration when they designed the adapter, eh?

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

User ID wrote:

...

Hawgsters are rather fearful of adapters for both cards and lenses. Makes for great multi page arguments and lengthy pontification in the Great UHH Sacred Tradition.

Definitely.

I sacrificed an adapter to take pictures of the inside to show that they were just "wire extensions" in it.
Nothing causing a "delay". Squished that argument.
It's amazing how people will argue what the don't understand, but simply feel.

Jeffcs Loc: Myrtle Beach South Carolina

I would thing the micro cards could not be as fast as standard add to that another set of contacts personally I wouldn’t use them

BebuLamar

I don't think there is a problem with the micro SD but I use the SD card in devices that take them. 1 piece is simpler than 2. I only need 32GB card as I never fill one of them up in 1 day shooting and thus the cost isn't important to me.