SD Card Comparison
Oct 26, 2018 09:39:56 #
While looking at canonrumors this morning I see that they conducted a test to determine the fastest SD card. The top 5 cards were 3 Lexars and 2 others I have never heard of. Surprisingly, the 3 slowest cards were all Sandisk. Didn't expect that. The speeds of the top cards were such as few of us will ever need, and my stack of Sandisks work just fine in my 5DIV and 7DII, but I would have expected better results from them.
Oct 26, 2018 09:41:51 #
LFingar wrote:
While looking at canonrumors this morning I see that they conducted a test to determine the fastest SD card. The top 5 cards were 3 Lexars and 2 others I have never heard of. Surprisingly, the 3 slowest cards were all Sandisk. Didn't expect that. The speeds of the top cards were such as few of us will ever need, and my stack of Sandisks work just fine in my 5DIV and 7DII, but I would have expected better results from them.
Interesting.
But I'll continue to use Sandisk. (Had a Lexar chip go bad too soon in a phone.)
Oct 26, 2018 09:50:46 #
I've also had a Lexar card fail... I'll stick with my SanDisk
Oct 26, 2018 09:54:54 #
LFingar wrote:
While looking at canonrumors this morning I see that they conducted a test to determine the fastest SD card. The top 5 cards were 3 Lexars and 2 others I have never heard of. Surprisingly, the 3 slowest cards were all Sandisk. Didn't expect that. The speeds of the top cards were such as few of us will ever need, and my stack of Sandisks work just fine in my 5DIV and 7DII, but I would have expected better results from them.
Maybe SanDisk is just not configured to work in Canon. I am a Nikon user and used Lexar and SanDisk cards for 10 years and never noticed any speed issues. I stopped using Lexar cards 5-6 years ago because I had 2 fail within a 3-month period. Perhaps the study was sponsored with Lexar money? How much slower--- a millisecond or two?
Oct 26, 2018 10:00:27 #
tomcat wrote:
Maybe SanDisk is just not configured to work in Canon. I am a Nikon user and used Lexar and SanDisk cards for 10 years and never noticed any speed issues. I stopped using Lexar cards 5-6 years ago because I had 2 fail within a 3-month period. Perhaps the study was sponsored with Lexar money? How much slower--- a millisecond or two?
I've been using Sandisk in my Canon for ten years also with no problem.
Yes, the speed difference may be inconsequential to most people.
Oct 26, 2018 10:03:00 #
peterg
Loc: Santa Rosa, CA
The required SD card write speed depends on your camera and how you use it. The camera's manual should list the minimum card specs.
Oct 26, 2018 10:11:18 #
Longshadow wrote:
Interesting.
But I'll continue to use Sandisk. (Had a Lexar chip go bad too soon in a phone.)
But I'll continue to use Sandisk. (Had a Lexar chip go bad too soon in a phone.)
Higher performance from the same physical sized package often results in lower reliability. Don't know if that is a factor here, but, I'll stick with my Sandisks.
Oct 26, 2018 10:13:47 #
peterg wrote:
The required SD card write speed depends on your camera and how you use it. The camera's manual should list the minimum card specs.
This article wasn't about camera requirements. It was simply a test of overall card speed. Interesting, but of little value to most of us.
Oct 26, 2018 10:24:54 #
LFingar wrote:
Higher performance from the same physical sized package often results in lower reliability. Don't know if that is a factor here, but, I'll stick with my Sandisks.
Oct 26, 2018 12:50:00 #
That is surprising because every article I have read (many) Lexar & SanDisk run neck-to-neck at the top. Canon even recommends just these two for top performance. I have both (higher ends), take lots of HiDef & now 4K travel video and have never seen a performance difference.
Oct 26, 2018 14:12:18 #
Stardust wrote:
That is surprising because every article I have read (many) Lexar & SanDisk run neck-to-neck at the top. Canon even recommends just these two for top performance. I have both (higher ends), take lots of HiDef & now 4K travel video and have never seen a performance difference.
Keep in mind that we don't know what the actual test conditions were and if the difference is significant. To me, I am happy with my SanDisk cards and they write fast enough for me.
Oct 26, 2018 14:14:36 #
LFingar wrote:
While looking at canonrumors this morning I see that they conducted a test to determine the fastest SD card. The top 5 cards were 3 Lexars and 2 others I have never heard of. Surprisingly, the 3 slowest cards were all Sandisk. Didn't expect that. The speeds of the top cards were such as few of us will ever need, and my stack of Sandisks work just fine in my 5DIV and 7DII, but I would have expected better results from them.
The article you are referencing applies ONLY to the EOS R and will not apply to any other Canon camera as the EOS R is the only Canon body compatible with UHS II type SD cards, which is the subject of this article.
Oct 26, 2018 17:11:58 #
larryepage
Loc: North Texas area
If the cards were just slower than other cards, that would be no big deal to me as long as they are at least as fast as the specifications say they are supposed to be...
Oct 26, 2018 17:36:04 #
MT Shooter wrote:
The article you are referencing applies ONLY to the EOS R and will not apply to any other Canon camera as the EOS R is the only Canon body compatible with UHS II type SD cards, which is the subject of this article.
Good point, but I still find it surprising that Sandisk, with their reputation, isn't right up there with Lexar and the others for that class of card.
Oct 26, 2018 17:36:50 #
larryepage wrote:
If the cards were just slower than other cards, that would be no big deal to me as long as they are at least as fast as the specifications say they are supposed to be...
That's what matters: Getting what you pay for.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.