Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Panasonic / Leica

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 11, 2006, 12:09 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
d-sr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Abilene. TX
Posts: 1,486
Default

I boughttwo 2GB 150x Redata cards to use with my V-LUX 1 and decided to see if there is any difference bewteen the Ultra ll cards I had been using.

I use continous burst mode a lot so I just mounted the camera on a tripod in good light outside. I counted the number of shots the camera would take and record in 30 seconds. With the Redata 150x it took and recorded 50 shots in the 30 seconds. Using the SD Ultra ll card it took and recorded 52 shots. The download speed, using a 2.0 card reader was the same at 3:45 or 4.5 sec. eack photo on the Redata and 3:58 or 4.57 sec on the Ultra ll card. The Ultra ll card is cheaper by quite a bit.

I know this is not a scientific test but it's real worldand the way I will be using the camera.

If you are using anyone else's 150x cardcould you do the same thing tosee if you get about the same count. I thought the 150x should be faster that the Ultra 11 butthe ones I have aren't.

BTW: On the same setup last year,I was able to get 35 shots in 30 sec. with the FZ20.

Don
d-sr is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 11, 2006, 1:53 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
seemolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,255
Default

Hi Don,

it is not so easy to buy good cards.
I tested the a fast transcend card long ago, but my FZ5 did not like this specific card.
Lateron I wanted to buy a 130* card, but the comments at amazon stated, that this was only the reading speed. Concerning writing this "133*" card was a lame duck!
I ended with a corsair 60* - fast writing (60*) and reliable.
There was a test of 150 cards in Germany lately ('ct), your card is too new - sorry!

Some cards could read 4 times faster than writing! Their label constantly showed the speed of reading!

Examples:
Hama highspeed 2GB read: 19.7 write: 3.5 each standard card is faster!
sandisk UltraII 2GB read: 19.7 write: 11.2
ridata pro 150 500MB read: 19.4 write: 14.7

Ridata (500MB) was not that bad, but you see that sandisk is still good!


Sven

seemolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2006, 8:42 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
genece's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,111
Default

FWIW

Quite a while ago I checked about 10 different cards I had and all the cards over 1 gb and 32X or faster performed about the same in the camera....too close for me to say one was better than the other.......I just buy the faster cards as they are really cheap anymore.......I do not know where you are paying more for a Ridata than a Sandisk but you should check here.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820183184

One other thing when checking the speed of cards they should have a fresh format....cards can and do slow down.

One other thing ,I had some smaller cards and they were all slower no matter what speed they were marked as being.

some of those were slower than others with a Dane Electric being the slowest but they were all slower than the larger cards.

The Ridatas are my favorite but thats only because I use them much more than the other cards I have and I have not had any errors in thousands of transfers.
genece is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2006, 1:59 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
d-sr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Abilene. TX
Posts: 1,486
Default

I misworded that or something. I bought the 2GB Redata at NewEgg for $36.95 after you posted the sight a couple of weeks ago. I just ment that the Ultra ll cards are dropping in price after the Extreme lll cards came out. I think the Ultra ll cards are listed as 133x and theywork just as well asthe 150x and I don't think anyone needs the Extreme lll card that is a lot more expensive.....Don



genece wrote:
Quote:
FWIW

Quite a while ago I checked about 10 different cards I had and all the cards over 1 gb and 32X or faster performed about the same in the camera....too close for me to say one was better than the other.......I just buy the faster cards as they are really cheap anymore.......I do not know where you are paying more for a Ridata than a Sandisk but you should check here.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820183184

One other thing when checking the speed of cards they should have a fresh format....cards can and do slow down.

One other thing ,I had some smaller cards and they were all slower no matter what speed they were marked as being.

some of those were slower than others with a Dane Electric being the slowest but they were all slower than the larger cards.

The Ridatas are my favorite but thats only because I use them much more than the other cards I have and I have not had any errors in thousands of transfers.
d-sr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2006, 5:52 PM   #5
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

In most cases, the camera's interface to media becomes the bottleneck after a certain speed card.

So, you get diminishing returns buying a faster card after a certain point. For example, you may buy a card that is supposed to be twice as fast, and only see a 5 or 10% improvement (if that).

The DMC-FZ50 does have an unusually fast write speed to media for a non-DSLR camera model. I've seen it reported at over 5MB/Second to an Extreme III Card (it can write a 20MB Raw file in about 3.6 seconds).

But, that's still far slower than a newer card is capable of (if it's a card that *really* has it's rated speed available for writes).

So, you'd probably be spending more money than you need to going from a card like an Ultra II (rated at 10MB/Second) to an Extreme III (rated at 20MB/Second), since the camera's max speed to media appears to be around 6MB/Second, regardless of card speed. That's still very fast as write speed to media goes from a camera. Also, sometimes you find manufacturers using newer components that are really faster than a card's rated speed.

You also see compatiblity issues come up from time to time. A card that's fast in one camera may be slow in another because of the way it communicates with the camera. For example, even a standard speed Kingston CompactFlash card tests around 4 times as fast as some of the Kingston Elite Pro cards in a KM DSLR (due to what appears to be a compatibility issue with the Elite Pro cards and this particular camera).

So, it's usually a good idea to make sure someone else has tried a given card brand/model first, just to make sure it performs OK in a given camera. But, even that isn't a foolproof way to tell (since card manufacturers sometimes change component suppliers during production of the same brand/model of card).

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2006, 11:46 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
d-sr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Abilene. TX
Posts: 1,486
Default

Thanks Sven, Gene & Jim. I'm glad to know we don't need to go to the Extreamme lll card.Around 50 shots in 30 sec. is fast enough for me. I was only able to get 35 shots in 30 sec. using the Ultra ll card with the FZ20 and it's 5mp against 10mp with the V-LUX. I am very pleased with the speed and IQ of this new camera.............Don
d-sr is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:39 PM.