pecohen Loc: Central Maine

I've got a drawer full of old CF cards but the only device I still have that that can use them is an aging PC with a built-in card reader.

I've had no trouble with SD or micro-SD cards, though I try to handle them with care.

Carmine Loc: Westport, CT

Thanks to all for your insights. As is typical with technology, there have been improvements in the SD cards currently available. Now, those of us with big hands need to be careful and keep track of them. As a pro, i'd rather spend a little more on reliable media regardless of which size. But your comments give me confidence that the SD card can be reliable media.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

I am one of those who ruined an older camera inserting a CF card; I was in a hurry, and I guess I didn't put it in quite right. I don't see a point to them any more; the newest SD cards are plenty fast, and they are one more tool designers can use to make bodies more svelte. I'm guessing that most R&D is going into SD. CF cards aren't that big, so I'm guessing that someone who could lose one could lose either.

OviedoPhotos

I prefer CF cards, but use SD cards. The reason for this is that the iMac had a SD card reader built-in, along with my laptop. Besides I've bent a pin twice on my card reader.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Not sure, use only CF from the beginning with a Canon 10D.
Durability? Ask Jodi Arrias when she washed the SD card in the laundry to destroy murder evidence, the cops recovered the photos and she got life with no parole.
Never had problems, so far, with CF cards. But do worry at times about bending pins.

lsimpkins Loc: SE Pennsylvania

As a long time electronics engineering professional, I disliked any connector that had pins as opposed to sliding flat contacts. As you note, it does not take too much effort to miss-align pins resulting in failure to mate or outright breakage. For more fool-proof connections, I would vote for SD cards.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Why were CF cards made the way they were then with the pins?
Surely the sliding flat contacts have been around since CF cards were invented.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

If I understand correctly, a CF card uses parallel data lines - data is moved all at once, one bit per line - while an SD card uses a serial line - all data moves down the same line, one bit at a time. Thus, the CF card needs many more contacts, and pins are the only way to provide that many contacts in such a small package.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Thank you. Not an engineer but like to know reasons for such things.

moonhawk Loc: Land of Enchantment

[quote=Carmine]It's a little scary trusting your precious images to this tiny SD card that can get lost so easily. I've been shooting with CF cards for years and now a lot of new cameras have SD cards solely or CF/SD combinations. What's your opinion?[/quote

I have two cameras. One uses one of each, one uses two SD cards.

I set both cameras so that both cards record the same image--i.e., one backs up the other.

That way, worries about reliability/failure are greatly diminished.

moonhawk Loc: Land of Enchantment

[quote=Carmine]It's a little scary trusting your precious images to this tiny SD card that can get lost so easily. I've been shooting with CF cards for years and now a lot of new cameras have SD cards solely or CF/SD combinations. What's your opinion?[/quote

I have two cameras. One uses one of each, one uses two SD cards.

I set both cameras so that both cards record the same image--i.e., one backs up the other.

That way, worries about reliability/failure are greatly diminished.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

I don't think you need to be a pro photographer to want to shoot high fps. Sports makes up a portion of the field while others who require high fps are wild life photographers, and even some fine art photographers doing movement captures in studio work.

The article you quoted is 2 1/2 years old. Technology has vastly improved. SD and variants along with CF cards are at or above 300 MB /sec to 400 MB/sec. Newer cards will utilize sata technology and will operate at 750 MB/sec.. But for the most part today's CF and SD cards are comparable. You can find current articles just about anywhere on line.

What to pay attention to? What your camera can handle. Look at your manual or camera on-line services for specific listing. You can't just go out any buy the fastest if your camera can't handle it.

What I do personally? I buy big memory cards and never take the card out of the camera. CF cards use delicate pins in the camera and can be bent. Take CF or SD's out and you will expose them to elements and perhaps corrupt. Others argue buy small capacity cards and get many that way if anything happens you only lose a few pixs. If you get too many, you can lose them, or can can't remember which one is full or not. Some photographers have elaborate color coded storage systems to avoid that issue. It can all work.

jimmya Loc: Phoenix

I'd have to say that CF is more reliable.

Bill Houghton Loc: New York area

Perhaps a look at this YouTube,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWaF1vePqUE

I know the SD cards are pretty dang reliable having had one go threw the washer/dryer on one occasion and still working. I am now moving to the Eye-Fi cards. It a lot harder to lose them since they never leave the camera. Depending you your budget.

Just a little note, only the Pro will transfer RAW, but it will capture it. Class 10 Card. The Wi Fi size is limited to the Wi-Fi speed, cause RAW to take longer to download.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

Class 10 indicates only 10 MB/sec minimum speed. You really can't just go out an purchase any class 10. Today's speeds are well beyond 10 MB/sec. You also need UDMA 7 which is today's standard for minimum transfer rate of 167 MB/sec. Having thrown your card in the wash suggests that you should have larger cards that really never leave your camera. With today's two slot cameras you can potentially have several hundred GB of storage in your camera.