By
techdude on Wednesday, August 31st, 2011 |
No CommentsI’m shooting a wedding next month, which will be my first major event. I currently have a 4GB card but I know that won’t be big enough to handle an entire day of wedding activities, especially if I want to shoot in RAW, so I’m looking for a 16GB card. I’m using a Sony a200 – I know Sony cameras aren’t the most popular, but it takes great pictures. Based on my budget and user reviews, it’s come down to two main contenders:
The first card I considered was the Kingston Ultimate 266x 16GB:
http://www.amazon.com/Kingston-Ultimate-CompactFlash-CF-16GB-U2/dp/B001FO4QHI/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top
The other card I’m considering is a Duracell Pro Photo 600x 16GB (which is actually made by Dane-Elec):
http://www.amazon.com/Duracell-Speed-Compact-Flash-DU-CF6016G-C/dp/B004AM6SQO/ref=sr_1_23?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1308633802&sr=1-23
Real world tests http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/camera_multi_page.asp?cid=6007-9652 show the Kingston averaging right around 30MB/s. I can’t seem to find the link but I read somewhere that the Duracell writes closer to 40MB/s if I remember right. Either way, both cards will probably be plenty fast enough. I’m not concerned with how long it takes to copy photos to a PC.
Ultimately, I just want to be able to shoot bursts on a huge card without having to wait so long between writes. Both cards would get the job done, but I wonder if the extra speed would truly make a noticeable difference? Does anyone have experience with either of these cards, or other 16GB CompactFlash cards? What would you get?