Posted by Scott Anderson on November 18, 2009 at 10:14 AM
I just bought the Canon 5D Mark II but haven't purchased any memory cards yet. Is it better to get 16GB or 8GB cards for this? There's a big price difference between the two. Sandisk is currently offering a large rebate on packs of 3 and I want to make sure I get the right ones before doing this.
Posted by Sarah Marino on November 18, 2009 at 11:47 AM
I use the Sandisk Extreme III 8gb cards for my 5D2 and usually get about 275 to 300 photos on each card, I think. The Extreme III's are fast enough for me (I do not do much burst shooting or any video). I have also used 16 gb cards in the past, but then accidentally formatted one of them and did not realize I hadn't correctly transferred the photos to my computer until it was too late. This situation made me decide that I would rather space my photos out over a few more cards in case something happens to a card, etc.
Posted by Wick Smith on November 18, 2009 at 12:43 PM
I'm with Sarah on this one. I got the same special on the three Sandisk Extreme III cards, and it works great. I can use one card per day in a three day weekend, knowing that I won't loose all the photos if one craps out. I shoot wtih the 5dII and the max raw size & get about 280 shots per card.
Posted by Scott Anderson on November 18, 2009 at 2:32 PM
Thanks for your help!
Posted by Scott Fricke on November 18, 2009 at 2:35 PM
I'll third Sarah's point. Usually 275-300 photos will get me through a session, and I always carry extra cards, but I do stupid stuff all the time (haven't done anything in regard to memory cards but there's always a first time) and sticking with the smaller cards could potentially lessen the impact.
Posted by Stan Rose on November 18, 2009 at 3:23 PM
I get by just fine with my old 4 Gig card. Shoot less, enjoy more!
Posted by Bill Brennan on November 18, 2009 at 4:33 PM
I have the same experience as Stan.
Bill Brennan
Posted by Nat Coalson on November 18, 2009 at 11:49 PM
I worked with a client in New York last weekend and when he told me he was using 16gb cards (coincidentally with a 5D2) I expressed my thoughts that it was not a good idea... sure enough, toward the end of the trip he had a corrupt card, and at risk were his best/favorite images of the entire trip.
Using recovery software (PhotoRescue) I was able to save the files. Turned out the format of the card went bad, but the files were still intact.
I prefer to use 8gb cards with the 5D2. On occasion I might need to use 2 or 3 of them in a whole day of aggressive shooting, usually handheld stuff in burst mode. But for tripod work, I might only take 15 shots in a whole day, in which case a 4 or 8 gb card is more than enough.
Posted by David Bostedo on November 19, 2009 at 2:02 PM
I'll just point out that the more cards you have, the higher the odds at least one of them is going to fail. So with multiple cards, you lower your risk of losing ALL of your pictures, but increase your risk of losing SOME of your pictures.
Personally, I think it's a bit of a wash, since failures are relatively infrequent, and images are often recoverable. Do what makes you feel more comfortable.
Posted by Paul DeCesare on November 20, 2009 at 3:07 AM
For stills, my 3 SanDisk 8GB IV's are more than ample, that's nearly 900 images (RAW-only).
For video, having only three 8GB cards is like wearing jeans two sizes too small... drives me batty. 12 minutes eats 4GB, I'm changing cards way too often and trying to dump video on a laptop in between sometimes. If I could afford it I'd carry six 32GB cards. I don't think SanDisk's new 64GB work in the 5D2, I think 32GB is the most the cameras can handle. Even six 16GBs would suffice. I know that Nat and others shudder at >8GB, but it's a risk you need to take for video or you'd better have 20 8GB cards!
So, the medium dictates the need. For stills you're fine with the 8GB. Mine have never failed (I always reformat the cards in camera after each off-load, I NEVER delete images inside of WIndows). For the price point, the 16GB are too expensive, I looked at that rebate too.
Posted by Fred Stearns on November 20, 2009 at 1:06 PM
It wasn't too long ago when the thought of using any card bigger than 512 MB was enough to send you into cardiac arrest.
Posted by Paul DeCesare on November 23, 2009 at 11:57 AM
WHOA! Y'all ready to spend $700 on ONE CF card, like we used to back in 2005? Here's the latest SanDisk offering, the 64GB Extreme CF, rated at 90mb/sec. Honestly, until the "new" hype passes and the price comes down, will anyone really spend this much on one card? And will it be more reliable than the current 8+GB cards is the bigger question.
Discussion
11 repliesBill Brennan
Using recovery software (PhotoRescue) I was able to save the files. Turned out the format of the card went bad, but the files were still intact.
I prefer to use 8gb cards with the 5D2. On occasion I might need to use 2 or 3 of them in a whole day of aggressive shooting, usually handheld stuff in burst mode. But for tripod work, I might only take 15 shots in a whole day, in which case a 4 or 8 gb card is more than enough.
Personally, I think it's a bit of a wash, since failures are relatively infrequent, and images are often recoverable. Do what makes you feel more comfortable.
For video, having only three 8GB cards is like wearing jeans two sizes too small... drives me batty. 12 minutes eats 4GB, I'm changing cards way too often and trying to dump video on a laptop in between sometimes. If I could afford it I'd carry six 32GB cards. I don't think SanDisk's new 64GB work in the 5D2, I think 32GB is the most the cameras can handle. Even six 16GBs would suffice. I know that Nat and others shudder at >8GB, but it's a risk you need to take for video or you'd better have 20 8GB cards!
So, the medium dictates the need. For stills you're fine with the 8GB. Mine have never failed (I always reformat the cards in camera after each off-load, I NEVER delete images inside of WIndows). For the price point, the 16GB are too expensive, I looked at that rebate too.