| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Slooooooow writing to 8 gig CF card
Michael Stevens, Photographer
 |
Phoenix | AZ | USA | Posted: 10:56 PM on 10.24.07 |
->> Anyone experience very slow writing to a larger CF card?
I've got an 8 gig Lexar Professional 133x card for backpacking so I can shoot RAW and not worry about storage space.
I also shoot races & triathalon events for ASI & Brightroom and last weekend at the Koman Race for the Cure in Phoenix I was using it, figuring that I certainly couldn't fill it especially since they use very small files.
I got a little more than 2000 images on it when I noticed the camera not responding. I thought it was having a hard time focusing until I noticed BUSY in the viewfinder and on the top LCD. I gave it a few seconds and started shooting again. Same thing...
I sat there for almost a minute while the camera wrote images to the CF card. When the light went out I replaced it with a 2 gig Lexar Professional 133x card and everything worked fine for the rest of the day.
I format the card in camera before every use and it's actually only been used 3 times.
The only thing I can think of is that with so many images the camera is having a hard time keeping the file system in order. I don't know enough about it but I know when I view a directory on my computer with a lot of files it takes longer to start displaying files than with a relatively empty directory.
I did not notice any slower transfer of files...
Any ideas on what is going on?
Thanks,
Mike |
|
Max Simbron, Photographer, Assistant
|
Phoenix | AZ | USA | Posted: 1:17 AM on 10.25.07 |
->> Mike,
I've got 2 Ridata Pro 8GB and a Transcend 16GB card. Trust me, they slow down as you fill up the card. One thing I've been advised is that if you format in windows, with a larger cluster size (I believe the cameras go for a 4k cluster), say 32 or 64k, then the allocation table is smaller (becuase it's keeping track of less clusters).
But regardless, as the cards get bigger, they will get slower towards the end of the card.
I'm interested in trying some 233 or 300X cards, especially once the firmware for some cameras come out to support the UDMA modes on the new cards.
Hope this offered some insight,
Max |
|
Derrick den Hollander, Photographer
|
Melbourne | VIC | AUSTRALIA | Posted: 5:07 AM on 10.25.07 |
->> I've trialled an ATP 150X 8Gb card, and have done so for about 5000 images, or the last 2 and a half months.
These are allegedly the fastest, 10x more reliable than any other brand (according to the marketing hype), robust, weatherproof cards a professional can possibly use.
I had been impressed with it's performance, until about a week ago it simply would'nt work. No matter which camera I use or try to format with, or what PC/Mac recovery software I use, it is completely fried.
I could get it fixed possibly, but I'd never trust the card again.
So for me, despite all of ATP'S claims and the Australian distributor's claims, I'd not use another card of this brand.
My Sandisk 8gb Ultra card is still going strong, after I'd estimate around 30000 images. |
|
Debra L Rothenberg, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 9:16 AM on 10.25.07 |
->> Michael,
I have the same card, as well as a Sandisk 8gb and they are also SLOOOOOOW. I have never gotten the busy before I used them
Debbie |
|
Barry Curtis, Photographer
|
Laguna Beach | Ca | | Posted: 7:32 PM on 10.25.07 |
->> No one has mentioned what CAMERA BODY?
I assume the Mk II.
I have had the same problem with 4gb and 8gb 133x plus.
I went back to the 2gb cards.
I do have the recent canon update on the camera,
oh well.
I wonder if the MK III has delay in writing to the 8gb?
Anyone?
( still waiting for the fix before I buy one)
Barry |
|
Debra L Rothenberg, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 1:43 AM on 10.26.07 |
| ->> Nikon D2X, D2Xs |
|
Mark Stewart, Photographer
|
Melbourne | VIC | Australia | Posted: 4:21 AM on 10.26.07 |
->> Tip with big cards on MK2's - when it starts slowing down open a new folder on the card.
Haven't had a need on Nikons, they seem to buffer quicker. |
|
Michael Stevens, Photographer
|
Phoenix | AZ | USA | Posted: 8:50 PM on 10.26.07 |
| ->> I'll have to try that, Mark... |
|
Michael Stevens, Photographer
|
Phoenix | AZ | USA | Posted: 9:34 AM on 01.21.11 |
->> A little update after PF Changs last weekend...
I shot the Kids Rock event on Saturday and captured a few more than 2600 images shot on a 4 gig card with no issues whatsoever. The kids event was A LOT slower than the real race. There were several hundred kids in spurts of 5 to 10 at a time so I wasn't really machine gunning it for this race.
For the half marathon I was posted in a lift so had the opportunity to shoot a BOATLOAD of images. Wound up with a few more than 12,500 images and had a little time to experiment, so to speak.
Still using the 1D.II and this time 4 gig cards.
I started off with little problem. Got to around 1600 images and then it really started to get busy. It's literally as fast as you can frame a new runner and hit the shutter release for stretches. And your breaks in between these machine gun stretches are maybe 2-10 seconds, not minutes.
Once it started getting busy I started making new folders. About every 1000 images it'd bog down and I'd have to let it catch up. I even took a moment to pause after only several hundred photos in machine gun fashion and the red light was on for some time.
Then it dawned on me that when you make a new folder you are forced to wait until the buffer is completely empty. Maybe that's the key? Having a completely empty buffer? So, the next time it bogged down I just let the buffer empty and continued shooting. Now, instead of ~1000 images I only got around 300 images before it would bog down.
So, it appears the issue two-, three-, maybe four-fold:
1. The camera's buffer is just too slow.
2. The camera is unable to write to the media fast enough.
3. The media is unable to be written to fast enough.
4. The media is not able to efficiently store large quantities of images.
I did not notice what "speed" of cards I was using but being this is a huge organization I suspect they buy based on price and availability, not speed. Not to mention many of these cards have been around since before speed was even printed on the label. The original cards I used for the original race that started this thread were Lexar 8 gig cards with a 133 speed printed on them.
So, not only are the cards not the fastest I suspect the camera probably wasn't even designed to take advantage of x133 speeds, let alone the newer x300+ cards.
Looks like I need to find another body for big races like this. Maybe if I get another CPS will let me back in since they kicked me out last year after downgrading my 28-70 lens to a "not supported" status. I guess after a couple years use a lens or body can no longer be used to professional purposes. |
|
Michael Durisseau, Photographer, Assistant
|
Santa Fe/Houston | TX | USA | Posted: 11:26 AM on 01.21.11 |
->> I wrote Chuck Westfall at Canon about this. Here is is answer to me:
Hi, Michael:
There are now three types of SD cards on the market:
1. Original SD cards, which have a maximum capacity of 2GB
2. High Capacity SDHC cards, which range from 4GB to 32GB
3. Extended Capacity SDXC cards, which start at 48GB and have a theoretical maximum capacity of 2TB. The highest capacity currently available is 64GB.
Based on your description, it sounds like you have one SD card (the 2GB one) and one SDHC card (the 8GB one). You should be able to tell by looking at the card labels. FYI, the regular SD cards tend to have much faster write speeds than the SDHC cards, but the trade-off is that the maximum capacity of regular SD cards is only 2GB. This is not a huge problem for low-res cameras like the 1D Mark IIN, especially if you're shooting JPEGs, but it can become problematic if you're shooting RAW files which are much larger in size, or if you are using EOS models with higher resolution like the 1Ds Mark III, for example.
Unlike standard SD cards, which are typically not labelled in terms of their card writing speed, SDHC cards have write speed classifications, such as Class 2, 4, 6 and 10. If you look on the card label, you should be able to find a logo that looks like the letter C with a number inside it. The bargain-priced and/or older versions of SDHC cards are usually Class 6 or lower. The higher-priced SDHC cards are usually Class 10, and some of the very latest ones are using a new write speed standard called UHS-I. FYI, none of our cameras that use SD cards are compatible with the high-speed functionality of UHS-I SDHC cards.
Your 1D Mark II N requires firmware version 1.1.2 in order to be compatible with SDHC cards up to Class 10.
Note that this firmware does not provide compatibility for SDXC memory cards. There's no word on whether Canon Inc. will offer another firmware update for the 1D Mark II N to change this.
Maybe this will help someone. |
|
Michael Stevens, Photographer
|
Phoenix | AZ | USA | Posted: 9:05 AM on 01.28.11 |
->> Michael D, thanks for all the info but I'm using a 1D Mark II, not the n, and I'm using Compact Flash, not SD cards. Although, you even mentioning it makes me wonder if the camera would perform the same using SD media. One of the reasons I was excited for the Mark II was that it had the SD slot and that media is naturally faster than CF media (especially back when it was new).
May be need for another test soon... |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|