Camera media: SD, SDHC, SDHC Ultra...

[swords]

I got my new digital camera. It uses SDHC media which means it supports the "faster new media" but is it any better to pay the extra for "SDHC Ultra", "Ultra II" and "Extreme"? I bought an SDHC Ultra II card with the camera which says on the packaging that this media takes pictures faster, is that really true? I mean doesn't it all depend on the mechanics of the camera, lighting, exposure, etc and not the media? Is the transfer rate of the media not really an issue or is it?

 

[larry]

I got the extreme III compact flash that does 30mb/sec. It doesn't let you take pics any faster (limited to your camera's fps), but it does/should transfer the files to your computer faster.

 

[DrWurm]

I believe that take pictures faster refers to the actual amount of pictures you can take in rapid succession. Most DSLRs have a rapid fire (I call it "machine gun") option. However, this is limited by the speed at which your camera can write to the media. I have an Ultra II (CF 15mb/s) with my Olympus E-510 and can take about 9 shots in rapid succession before a marked decrease in the speed between shots. I assume what happens is the camera has some sort of internal memory buffer feeding into the card. Once the buffer is filled, a file must be transferred to the card before another can be queued up.

And as larry said, a faster card will also transfer faster to your computer.

Jason

 

[swords]

Thanks for the input. Then it's not really "capturing your memories faster" like the package/sales people say but rather "unloading your memories faster" into the PC. I've never thought that took too long anyway, I can wait a couple seconds! lol!

Does Ultra and Extreme media have anything to do with capturing video on a digital camera, is it "better" for filming?

 

[seedjar]

High-speed memory is worth it for certain types of cameras. Very low-end cameras usually have little in the way of buffering and often use unnecessarily high megapixel counts to offset poor optics, so if they can take advantage of higher speeds (a big if,) it will improve your overall shooting speed. (Not the shutter speed, but the delay between shots.) High-end cameras, or even entry level cameras made by high-quality outfits - i.e. real camera companies, not computer accessory vendors - will almost certainly perform more responsively when shooting with high-speed memory. Ultimately, though, it depends a lot on what you're asking of your camera. If you don't need rapid-fire shooting like Jason mentioned you may never notice a difference. If you plan to be doing stuff where time is crucial, though, like taking pictures of things moving at high speeds, it's probably worth the price.
~Joe

 

[DrWurm]

Thanks for the input. Then it's not really "capturing your memories faster" like the package/sales people say but rather "unloading your memories faster" into the PC. I've never thought that took too long anyway, I can wait a couple seconds! lol!

I wouldn't say that. High speed media is crucial for people who film fast moving things like sports games. Chances are if you take 10 rapid photos, you'll capture what you want in one of them. In my experience, it's a good idea to be prepared for anything.

As for video, I don't think it's terribly important. Most cameras take lower resolution video, so media speed does not need to be as high.

Jason

 

[rattler]

in my experience its handy for high speed sports shooting with my DSLR........my lil point and shoot does fine with the regular cards for shooting video.......as Jason said your usually shooting at a much lower res so its not a big deal.....not sure if it would make a difference when shooting in HD though cause i dont have a camera that will do that.....

edit to add....as far as those who say its no big deal on downloading speed havent filled up a 4 gig card and had to download it in a time crunch........between 3 cameras we took well over 2300 photos and about an hours worth of video over 3 days.....cleaning off cards onto 2 hard drives(both the shops and dumping what i took onto my laptop) and wiping them for the next go round in a timely matter was important.....the faster cards were noticeably faster than the standard ones......

 

[rattler]

i like the term machine gunning but it aint quite accurate.....my 40D does about 6.5 pictures a second if i i set it right, though i rarely do cause i go for higher resolution......if it could keep up that pace(which it cant.....slows down after 10 or so shots) it would be firing at 390 frames a minute or so.....most machine guns operate at 600 to 800 rounds per minute.......there are a few that go over 1000 using a single barrel(versus a minigun that uses multiple barrels) but they generally dont last to long cause that is some unbelievable wear and tear on a gun......a full outo MAC10 comes to mind, but they are so poorly built that they start coming apart after a couple thousand rounds....the stamped sheet metal receiver heats up, messes up the tempering and stuff starts breaking......the Uzi, which the MAC was roughly copied off of runs at 600 rounds a minute using the same ammo and will keep operating for tens of thousands of rounds if not more........speed comes at a price.........

now back to your regularly scheduled programing.....my wife keeps saying if she can find a practical use for all this useless info rocketing around in my head she will make millions

 

[swords]

Thanks guys. I more than likely won't be doing any sports shooting but I suppose fast write speed could come in handy for live shots at concerts and such. Plants and landscapes aren't going anywhere!

Rattler with your knowledge of guns you ought to be a consultant at the Warhammer novels publishing house. Just how well could a 10,000 year old bolt thrower in constant use actually work... Guess that's why it's called sci-fi!