If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Memory cards reliable enough?
In the past it used to be so that you could not trust memory cards, so
you would not use too large sizes, to avoid losing all images in case of a malfunction. But I get the impression that nowadays memory cards are very reliable, so you could in principle put a 256GB memory card into the camera, and only use that for an entire trip. Any thoughts about this? -- Alfred Molon Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Memory cards reliable enough?
On Sat, 11 Jul 2015 22:01:00 +0200, Alfred Molon
wrote: In the past it used to be so that you could not trust memory cards, so you would not use too large sizes, to avoid losing all images in case of a malfunction. But I get the impression that nowadays memory cards are very reliable, so you could in principle put a 256GB memory card into the camera, and only use that for an entire trip. Any thoughts about this? Uh oh... |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Memory cards reliable enough?
On 11/07/2015 21:01, Alfred Molon wrote:
In the past it used to be so that you could not trust memory cards, so you would not use too large sizes, to avoid losing all images in case of a malfunction. But I get the impression that nowadays memory cards are very reliable, so you could in principle put a 256GB memory card into the camera, and only use that for an entire trip. Any thoughts about this? Maybe, if you're taking a good backup every day. Personally I used 3 x 16 GB cards rather than 1 x 64 GB. Cheaper too! -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Memory cards reliable enough?
In article , David Taylor
wrote: Personally I used 3 x 16 GB cards rather than 1 x 64 GB. Cheaper too! 3*16 = 48. you have less capacity than a 64 gig card. it's no surprise it's cheaper. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Memory cards reliable enough?
In article , Alfred
Molon wrote: In the past it used to be so that you could not trust memory cards, so you would not use too large sizes, to avoid losing all images in case of a malfunction. there has never been an issue with name brand cards to where they could not be trusted. there was an issue with noname cards and counterfeit cards in particular, however, but that's what you get when buying crap. nothing is perfect and there's always a risk anything might fail, just as there's a risk the camera itself might fail or that you'll be mugged and someone might steal the camera with whatever card is in it. however, in normal use (and avoiding the seedier parts of town), that risk is very low. But I get the impression that nowadays memory cards are very reliable, so you could in principle put a 256GB memory card into the camera, and only use that for an entire trip. Any thoughts about this? you could, but there's still only one copy. if someone steals the camera, it doesn't matter how good the card you had was. consider getting a portable storage device to offload the images, assuming you don't want to bring a laptop. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Memory cards reliable enough?
On 2015-07-11 16:08:15 +0000, nospam said:
In article , Alfred Molon wrote: In the past it used to be so that you could not trust memory cards, so you would not use too large sizes, to avoid losing all images in case of a malfunction. there has never been an issue with name brand cards to where they could not be trusted. I use Sandisk and Lexar CF and SDHC cards in a variety of sizes, (a whole bunch of low capacities), 8, 16, and 32 GB and as of posting this response I haven't had a card failure in about 12 years. there was an issue with noname cards and counterfeit cards in particular, however, but that's what you get when buying crap. I just avoid bargain basement cards. B&H, Adorama, and Amazon regularly have special sales on quality cards. nothing is perfect and there's always a risk anything might fail, just as there's a risk the camera itself might fail or that you'll be mugged and someone might steal the camera with whatever card is in it. however, in normal use (and avoiding the seedier parts of town), that risk is very low. But I get the impression that nowadays memory cards are very reliable, so you could in principle put a 256GB memory card into the camera, and only use that for an entire trip. Any thoughts about this? you could, but there's still only one copy. if someone steals the camera, it doesn't matter how good the card you had was. consider getting a portable storage device to offload the images, assuming you don't want to bring a laptop. That is why part of my travel kit is a HyperDrive ColorSpace UDMA. They have updated it since I bought mine, but it still does what is needed. I upgraded my old 250GB unit with a new 500 GB drive and a fresh battery. Their current version. http://www.hypershop.com/HyperDrive/HDU2-000.html -- Regards, Savageduck |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Memory cards reliable enough?
On Sat, 11 Jul 2015 09:36:11 -0700, Savageduck
wrote: On 2015-07-11 16:08:15 +0000, nospam said: In article , Alfred Molon wrote: In the past it used to be so that you could not trust memory cards, so you would not use too large sizes, to avoid losing all images in case of a malfunction. there has never been an issue with name brand cards to where they could not be trusted. I use Sandisk and Lexar CF and SDHC cards in a variety of sizes, (a whole bunch of low capacities), 8, 16, and 32 GB and as of posting this response I haven't had a card failure in about 12 years. there was an issue with noname cards and counterfeit cards in particular, however, but that's what you get when buying crap. I just avoid bargain basement cards. B&H, Adorama, and Amazon regularly have special sales on quality cards. nothing is perfect and there's always a risk anything might fail, just as there's a risk the camera itself might fail or that you'll be mugged and someone might steal the camera with whatever card is in it. however, in normal use (and avoiding the seedier parts of town), that risk is very low. But I get the impression that nowadays memory cards are very reliable, so you could in principle put a 256GB memory card into the camera, and only use that for an entire trip. Any thoughts about this? you could, but there's still only one copy. if someone steals the camera, it doesn't matter how good the card you had was. consider getting a portable storage device to offload the images, assuming you don't want to bring a laptop. That is why part of my travel kit is a HyperDrive ColorSpace UDMA. They have updated it since I bought mine, but it still does what is needed. I upgraded my old 250GB unit with a new 500 GB drive and a fresh battery. Their current version. http://www.hypershop.com/HyperDrive/HDU2-000.html It almost looks as though you could use a smartphone to backup from a wifi enabled camera to the hyper. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Memory cards reliable enough?
On 2015-07-11 22:47:12 +0000, Eric Stevens said:
On Sat, 11 Jul 2015 09:36:11 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On 2015-07-11 16:08:15 +0000, nospam said: In article , Alfred Molon wrote: In the past it used to be so that you could not trust memory cards, so you would not use too large sizes, to avoid losing all images in case of a malfunction. there has never been an issue with name brand cards to where they could not be trusted. I use Sandisk and Lexar CF and SDHC cards in a variety of sizes, (a whole bunch of low capacities), 8, 16, and 32 GB and as of posting this response I haven't had a card failure in about 12 years. there was an issue with noname cards and counterfeit cards in particular, however, but that's what you get when buying crap. I just avoid bargain basement cards. B&H, Adorama, and Amazon regularly have special sales on quality cards. nothing is perfect and there's always a risk anything might fail, just as there's a risk the camera itself might fail or that you'll be mugged and someone might steal the camera with whatever card is in it. however, in normal use (and avoiding the seedier parts of town), that risk is very low. But I get the impression that nowadays memory cards are very reliable, so you could in principle put a 256GB memory card into the camera, and only use that for an entire trip. Any thoughts about this? you could, but there's still only one copy. if someone steals the camera, it doesn't matter how good the card you had was. consider getting a portable storage device to offload the images, assuming you don't want to bring a laptop. That is why part of my travel kit is a HyperDrive ColorSpace UDMA. They have updated it since I bought mine, but it still does what is needed. I upgraded my old 250GB unit with a new 500 GB drive and a fresh battery. Their current version. http://www.hypershop.com/HyperDrive/HDU2-000.html It almost looks as though you could use a smartphone to backup from a wifi enabled camera to the hyper. My antique edition the UDMA rather than the UDMA2 does not have that ability. However, mine reads several different card types, and provides viewing of many RAW file types including current, but not limited to NEF, CR2, RAF, and DNG. I believe the Wi-Fi access to iOS or Android device is to provide a means for the social media addicted to play. My X-E2 gives me quite interesting Wi-Fi features when paired with an iOS or Android device. I can transfer files from the camera to the mobile device. I can use my iPad or iPhone as a remote control which includes a remote through the lens, or should I say, off the sensor view, and control of all exposure and focus functions. Then I can browse the contents of the camera on the iOS/Android device. Finally the iPhone or iPad acts as a GPS tracker and will sync to the camera to GEO-tag the image files. This is the remote view: https://db.tt/kLCyps14 -- Regards, Savageduck |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Memory cards reliable enough?
nospam wrote:
In article , Alfred Molon wrote: In the past it used to be so that you could not trust memory cards, so you would not use too large sizes, to avoid losing all images in case of a malfunction. there has never been an issue with name brand cards to where they could not be trusted. there was an issue with noname cards and counterfeit cards in particular, however, but that's what you get when buying crap. nothing is perfect and there's always a risk anything might fail, just as there's a risk the camera itself might fail or that you'll be mugged and someone might steal the camera with whatever card is in it. however, in normal use (and avoiding the seedier parts of town), that risk is very low. But I get the impression that nowadays memory cards are very reliable, so you could in principle put a 256GB memory card into the camera, and only use that for an entire trip. Any thoughts about this? you could, but there's still only one copy. if someone steals the camera, it doesn't matter how good the card you had was. consider getting a portable storage device to offload the images, assuming you don't want to bring a laptop. There is available a small walkman-sized device that runs on AA NiMH cells. You put the camera's SD card into it,and a blank CD-R , and it burns the images onto the CD. It is fast and easy. I use SanDisc SD cards, usually 8 GB, and in using hundreds for both music and images, I have had only one failure. In addition, on a field shoot,or a trip, each night I back up images to my travel PC's solid state memory. My biggest fear is putting all that stuff into a basket at the airports' security screening.JFK is infamous for pairs of crooks stealing stuff from the baskets after being examined by the TSA. Mort Linder |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Memory cards reliable enough?
In article , Mort
wrote: consider getting a portable storage device to offload the images, assuming you don't want to bring a laptop. There is available a small walkman-sized device that runs on AA NiMH cells. You put the camera's SD card into it,and a blank CD-R , and it burns the images onto the CD. It is fast and easy. cds?? seriously?? burning a cd is neither fast nor easy. it's slow, clunky and primitive. a much better choice is a hard drive based device which can hold zillions of images. copying is fast and without needing to chop it up into cd-sized chunks. plus, you don't need to carry a box of blanks either. I use SanDisc SD cards, usually 8 GB, and in using hundreds for both music and images, I have had only one failure. 8 gb = over a dozen cds. In addition, on a field shoot,or a trip, each night I back up images to my travel PC's solid state memory. My biggest fear is putting all that stuff into a basket at the airports' security screening.JFK is infamous for pairs of crooks stealing stuff from the baskets after being examined by the TSA. put that stuff *inside* your carryon. there's never a reason to use those baskets. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Buying SDHC cards from eBay... how can I know which merchants are reliable? How to guard against fake cards? | Duncan H. Davies | Digital Photography | 18 | May 24th 08 12:35 AM |
Buying SDHC cards from eBay... how can I know which merchants are reliable? How to guard against fake cards? | Duncan H. Davies | Digital SLR Cameras | 17 | May 24th 08 12:35 AM |
Compaq Presario Not Recongnized Memory Cards in Memory Card Reader | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 17 | August 18th 06 05:09 AM |
Storage devices which can use Memory Stick Pro memory cards | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 2 | January 17th 05 11:14 AM |
Storage devices which can use Memory Stick Pro memory cards | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 0 | January 17th 05 04:01 AM |