Photo-Al Loc: Sonoma County, CA

Thanks for the link ... I finally did locate it, and it is the same price here. I also noticed a PNY "Pro Elite" 32MB with a 50 MB/s transfer rate for $69.99. That's 2.5 x faster than the 39.99 card, and with my rodeo shooting, that might be worthwhile. Decisions, decisions ....

Love this forum! Thanks again.

bawlmer Loc: Baltimore, MD

:thumbup: :thumbup:

sueyeisert Loc: New Jersey

I don't buy PNY I had several go bad. I rather use Lexar or Sandisk.

bawlmer Loc: Baltimore, MD

I've heard of that happening, but I've been using them for years and have never had an issue.

Dun1 Loc: Atlanta, GA

Shooting RAW images will take a little more time than JPEGS. However the other factors that apply are the time of the day, a bright sunighted day with the camera set on a proper exposure will get on to the card and processor faster. If You purchase the high class cards you will find that the buffer is not as loaded as it would be with a less expensive or cheap card.
The faster cards will also allow you to download your files from the card caster than the less expensive cards that do not have a faster read and write speed
The advantage of shooting RAW images is that is more akin to snatching the image off your cameras processor and you will get more information from RAW images.
Some images that are shot in poorly lit scenes, darker lit scenes take you camera processor longer to write to the card, if you shoot a dark lit scene in RAW and you wish to correct the color balance and temps you will be able to make the adjustments far better than JPEGs.
If you to the Sandisk link below and plug in your camera it in the upper corner of the page it should give you which cards and card speeds that should operate in your camera
If you shoot action shots with slower or less expensive cards and you want to capture the images at the full burst rate your camera will allow, if you have a slower card you might get great images in frame 1, 2, 3, but frame 4 might be under exposed if not blurred altogether
There should be no need for you to shoot RAW+Jpeg as less said also, why take up more card space with bot RAW and JPEG formats.
This high capacity faster cards also become important because so many cameras today are able to record movies.
Being able to take a series of shots at the maximum burst rate allowed for your camera, the processor speed of your camera, read write speed of the card in your camera also requires that you set the tracking sensitivity of the tracking mode, i.e. slow fast etc, and it also depends on whether or not you have the tracking method set to maintain focus on the main subject as long as it is in the lens.
Where you are shooting, is the subject close enough to you and your camera to fill the frame with the subject. If the subject is a far distance from you and your camera you will find that your camera will not lock auto focus as fast as if the subject was nearer to your camera and lens.
Don't expect a cheap cards to give you the performance of a higher speed or class card, the equiv is having an eight cylinder engine and removing four of the spark plugs. The engine is going to gun at half the speed and power as it would if eight cylinders are firing

country Loc: back woods

where is the link?...

saichiez Loc: Beautiful Central Oregon

Best answer you will find on the burst rate question.

Grab a minute or two with all those photographers at sporting or racing events. You know the ones.... Big humongous lenses, often white, often on a monopod. (after the game or race of course)

Ask them if they shoot RAW...

I'd bet NADA,,,

Now, go to a few weddings and ask a wedding photographer (after the wedding)... "do you shoot RAW" Hmm???? again NADA, mebbe mixed.

I'm thinking far fewer Professionals shoot RAW than one might think. Landscape or Artsy.... yeah mebbe more.

Fashion.. I don't think so... Burst rate is more important in runway fashion than at a Soccer game.

I suspect RAW has become more the domain of amateurs who are seduced into the concept, and perhaps advanced amateurs. I also suspect RAW is used more by people who really want to spend more time in front of the computer and less time out capturing images.

I fall in the other camp... Been shooting film 40+ years, never did my own processing. Counted on the film emulsions and camera knowledge to get the right capture. Took up digital in addition to film over ten years ago. Went through the RAW and post processing phase. Now, have not done much post processing in the last 4 years and no RAW. Had Nikon and Canon FF, so I fully understand the need for Post Processing.

Settled on two other platforms who make better Sensor choices for color rendering, etc.

Perhaps my computer consulting work for the last 25 years has something to do with my avoidance of the computer as a tool of photography. Computers are good for file management and storage (and that's questionable... I always know my negs and transparencies will survive and be available regardless of technical evolution and failing web sites). For editing and image manipulation--- not so much.

Know and manage your camera. Make images that are fully usable and keepers OOC (Out of the Camera). Such cameras do exist. I use them... digital and film. No RAW here--massive improvement in my time spent.