Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 29, 2008, 8:01 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 2,274
Default

I'm planing on using RAW in the future to get themost out of what the a700 has to offer. Shooting only jpeg now, I'm happy with the extra detail but not so happy with the noise at ISO 400 and higher in the midtones (such as the sky and grays). I figure if you have to spend time to PP your photo's to get rid of the noise you as might as well shoot RAW.

Switching to RAW I definitley will need to get larger CF card/s and the Transcend 8GB 266X card really appeals to me.

My questions are;

1. Does the speed of the 266X make that big of a difference compared to a 133X card?

2. Does a 16GB card compared to a 8 or 4GB card increase the odds for a corrupt card?

3. Has anyone here useda Transcendcard and can recommend one?

Curentlly using Sandisk ultra II 1GB cards and can only get about 39 Raw + JPEGs per card. I believe a 8GB card should hold about 312.

Thanks.

Mike



lomitamike is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jun 30, 2008, 5:57 AM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I've got a 133x 16GB Transcend that works fine in my A700 (I've been using it since October).

If you want maximum speed, I'd probably go for the newer Transcend 300x SLC card.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820208417

In one test I saw, this card clocked at around 35MB/Second write speeds and 45MB/Second read speeds in a Lexar Firewire 800 UDMA Card reader, outperforming Lexar's 300x UDMA card in the same reader.



JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 2, 2008, 1:40 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 2,274
Default

JimC wrote:
Quote:
I've got a 133x 16GB Transcend that works fine in my A700 (I've been using it since October).

If you want maximum speed, I'd probably go for the newer Transcend 300x SLC card.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820208417

In one test I saw, this card clocked at around 35MB/Second write speeds and 45MB/Second read speeds in a Lexar Firewire 800 UDMA Card reader, outperforming Lexar's 300x UDMA card in the same reader.


After the hours I've spent waiting for the photo's to upload to my PC, I took your recommendation and went with Trandscend 8G 300x. Should be hear today. If I notice a huge difference I'll report back.

Thanks;

Mike
lomitamike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 2, 2008, 2:21 PM   #4
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

You should see a huge difference in buffer full frame rates shooting raw, as well as buffer flush times. With JPEG, even the 133x cards keep up just fine.

My Transcend 133x 16GB card is significantly faster than my Sandisk Ultra II Cards, clocking at around the same speed as an Extreme III. The Transcend 300x should be as fast as anything you can buy in the A700 (which supports UDMA) from tests I've seen in card readers (and I think it's extremely unlikely the A700 is going to have any issues with it, and the A700 supports UDMA).

As for the fastest transfer times to a PC, you'll need a card reader that supports UDMA for best performance. I personally wouldn't care about that part (have a cup of coffee while you're transferring images). lol

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2008, 3:17 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 2,274
Default

Jim, are you shooting raw, c-raw, raw + jpeg? Is there any particular reason for the format you've chosen?

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"
lomitamike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2008, 5:21 PM   #6
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I usually shoot craw + jpeg. That way, I'll have a raw file I can use if the jpeg is not acceptable for what I want to do with an image (without using as much space as raw would take up).


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2008, 7:07 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 2,274
Default

JimC wrote:
Quote:
I usually shoot craw + jpeg. That way, I'll have a raw file I can use if the jpeg is not acceptable for what I want to do with an image (without using as much space as raw would take up).

That sounds like the most logical choice for any of the formats available. So I guess it would be safe to say that your approach is to set up the camera (WB, metering, sharpness, saturation, ect) for a jpeg and hope for the best with a raw file as a backup. I've always taken the approach of just using the jpeg as reference (windows viewer) so you don't have open a editing program and always tweeking the raw file (with the 5D). But hey, I guess if the jpeg doesn't look bad why not just use it. Especially if your only printing 4X6.

Good advice. Have a great 4th.Thanks Jim.
lomitamike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2008, 9:43 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 21
Default

http://www.flash-memory-store.com/32...h-cf-card.html

I've used Qmemory for couple years very nice, fast and cheap
SONY R1 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 2:54 AM.