OldCADuser Loc: Irvine, CA

Note that when at home I connect my camera to my MacBook Pro using a cable to transfer images as I use a docking station/brick, as that's more convenient. However, when on the road, I generally pull the card from the camera and insert it into the MacBook. That being said, I always format my memory card in the camera after every download.

The 16Gb card in my Sony a6500 is a Sony brand, while my back-ups are from SanDisk.

User ID

At any capacity, the jump from V60 to V90 is kinda pricey. I always shoot raw + xfine, and usually 45MP but, after checking out the write speed of my cameras, I learned that V90 was faster than my cameras could write. V60 is an exact speed match.

Its usually worth checking out your cameras limits. Lately picked up an a9. Found it writes no faster than V60, and maxes out at 512gb.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Definitely worth checking the limits!

V90 cards are only necessary if the camera manual lists a specific use case for them, and you need that use case (i.e.; extra high quality video).

User ID

I shoot raw at max burst speeds, but even my highest rez cameras dont run faster than V60 for stills .... but close to that threshold, and my cameras are not the very mostest newest highest tech ( I tend to hang back by just one upgrade step).

R.G. Loc: Scotland

The only cameras that need V90 are the ones that are 8K capable. However, getting V90 gives a degree of future-proofing and it also speeds up the download times (a small difference in most cases but definitely a speed-up, and there's something about knowing that you have the fastest ). And at less than £30 for 32GB, the V90 option isn't prohibitively expensive. But in a less extravagant mood I would go for V60 which, as you say, is plenty for most cameras.

ackvil Loc: Delray Beach, FL

Wow, some of you guys take a lot of photos. I use one 128 card and transfter the photos to a computer and then delete the photos.

Buck1949 Loc: Phoenix

A few years ago I took a photo tour with a professional photographer from Getty while I was on vacation in Europe. He recommended that I use 16gb cards for the most part while vacationing. He suggested changing out the cards every 1-2 days (for longer vacations) in order to insure that if any of the cards were to become corrupted - then only ‘some’ of my vacation photos would be lost. I simply number each card and use them in order. It works for me - and as cheap as cards are now - it is worth it. Obviously if taking - a lot of videos then larger cards would be preferred.

OldCADuser Loc: Irvine, CA

Yes, that's a good point. I generally don't take videos with my Sony a6500 despite the fact that it has full 4K video capabilities. Being an old '35mm film guy', moving subjects never appealed to me all that much, I guess my eye was only looking at the 'moment'. The point being, those 16Gb SD cards that I use are more than enough to hold what would be even a big day, like when we did the Carlsbad Caverns back in October.

Now years ago, I had a BetaMax video camera, and I've since converted all my tapes to digital, but that was the extent of my video efforts. My wife's father shot a lot of Super8 film, all of which I've also converted to digital (and shared with her siblings), but that's about the extend of my interest in 'moving pictures'.

Basil Loc: New Mexico

For shooting individual stills, there is virtually no difference for me. For video, with my R5, no SD card is suitable for 8K or 4K ALL-I (Only IPB) but V60 is sufficient for everything else except 8K IPB 10-Bit which requires V90. Since I only shoot video to the CFExpress card anyway, these limitations don't concern me.

I had been getting V90 cards just because I assumed faster is better, even for stills, and it is - but not that much better. I recently bought a 512GB V60 Lexar card and (I posted about this in a different post) I decided to do a little test to compare performance between the V60 and my V90 cards. What I found was, the V60 cards would hit the buffer on High Speed shooting slightly sooner, but within a half second of the V90. With the V60 I could capture about 67 RAW images before hitting the buffer, while the V90 would capture ~73. The biggest difference was in the time it takes to clear the buffer. With the V60 it took about 14 seconds to clear the buffer, but the V90 wood clear in about 9 seconds. (This wasn't a scientific test by any stretch). Anyway, I concluded that for virtually all of my shooting, the V60 cards are more than adequate and as you said, the jump to V90 is kinda pricey. I still have a few V90 cards, but I think going forward, I will stick to getting V60 cards.

PAR4DCR Loc: A Sunny Place

Use 32gb cards for my Nikon D7100 and D7200. Have never filled one up completely yet.

Don

dbrugger25 Loc: Raleigh, NC

I use 64 and 128 gb cards and back them up to a 2 TB external SSD drive.

I have lost some treasured photos diue to computer crashes so I don't take any chances now.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

I check my camera manual for cards the manufacturer recommends for that camera, and use the largest ones they suggest.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

[quote=User ID…If all of my cards are nevervbeyond half full, then theyre all about the right size.
WHY ? Learn how solid state memory works. Im not about to do that much typing. Learn that and youll know the "why" of it.
...[/quote]

There’s no valid technical reason to leave half a NAND flash drive empty. Just a waste of usable space.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

I fill it to a picture or five (or ten) remaining, it depends. I never stop at half full.
If it's close to full (less that 10 or 20 spaces remain, I will use a new card the next day or location I go, just so I don't have to switch cards mid-stream.

User ID

"Valid technical reason" is in the mind of the beholder. In the real world, half full is just about right. No reason to be concerned about "wasting space". I have that space to leave it empty. Its not wasted, its intentionally empty.