Maximum size SD card for my camera?
Daguerreotype type
the SD card it can take is, "Storage Media SD/SDHC Memory Card,
MultiMediaCard, MMC Plus Card, HC MMC Plus Card."
Can anyone tell me the maximum size SD card or SDHC card that it will
take? Thanks for any help.
Neil Harrington
"Daguerreotype type" <nos...@no.invalid> wrote in message
news:6aq6o4tcmn3cogq6k...@4ax.com...
As long as it says SD or SDHC (SD High Capacity) it will take any SD card
that's of the standard physical size. Being able to use SDHC means it will
take cards of more than 2 GB capacity, which was the limit for many older
digital cameras using SD. Your A580 can use 4GB, 8GB, 16GB cards or any
other capacity that becomes available.
The only SD cards it *can't* take, at least without an adapter, are those of
much smaller than standard physical size such as MicroSD or MiniSD. You
probably wouldn't have any reason to buy something like that anyway.
The various MultiMedia Cards are not something you'd have any reason to care
about, unless you happen to have some already, and maybe not even then. They
are the same size as SD cards but not as good in performance, really an
older technology.
Daguerreotype type
Thanks a lot, Neil. That puts my mind to rest on this. I've been using
1GB SD cards for a while and I wanted to know how high I could go with
it. Now for a lot less swapping of cards.
Neil Harrington
"Daguerreotype type" <nos...@no.invalid> wrote in message
You're very welcome. Good luck with your A580. Those A-series Canons are
nice cameras and great bargains too. I've got an older A95 myself.
tony cooper
<nos...@no.invalid> wrote:
>
>Thanks a lot, Neil. That puts my mind to rest on this. I've been using
>1GB SD cards for a while and I wanted to know how high I could go with
>it. Now for a lot less swapping of cards.
While I don't say you are wrong in any way, I prefer having several
cards instead of one large card. If one card goes bad after a shoot
or a trip, you lose just the images on that card. It's never happened
to me, but it's not inconceivable.
Last week I went out to take some photos and found - an hour from home
- that I had left my card in the card reader. I keep two spare cards
in the case, though.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Wally
<tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 23:04:42 GMT, Daguerreotype type
><nos...@no.invalid> wrote:
>
>>
>>Thanks a lot, Neil. That puts my mind to rest on this. I've been using
>>1GB SD cards for a while and I wanted to know how high I could go with
>>it. Now for a lot less swapping of cards.
>
>While I don't say you are wrong in any way, I prefer having several
>cards instead of one large card. If one card goes bad after a shoot
>or a trip, you lose just the images on that card. It's never happened
>to me, but it's not inconceivable.
I just bought a 16 gig card for my camera. I'm betting I will never
lose a picture on it... but if I have a bunch of 2 gig cards, I have a
good chance of losing one or getting them mixed up. For me, no
fumbling with cards when I'm shooting. I'll most likely only need to
remove the card when I'm safely at the computer.
There are 32 gig cards coming available now... when the price comes
down I wil buy one of those.
Wally
Focus
"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:0237o4dlmrr7qa2vq...@4ax.com...
I totally agree.
I shoot raw professional (so 15 to 20 Mb size), like weddings, and like the
idea of swapping cards. Then when I have a full card, I back it up to an
image tank, which goes automatically. That way there is little or no chance
I mess up the pictures completely.
In my backpack I have two compartments for my cards: one for the empty ones
and one for the full ones.
Switching cards is very quick and much saver than relying on one single
card.
I can shoot a whole wedding with only 2 cards of 4 Gb (but I have more for
security). If you look at the prices of the 8 or 16 Gb, my goodness! I can
buy a 160 Gb imagetank and never think again about storage ;-)
Shooting with one big card is just plain dumb; you're testing (tempting) the
odds.
--
Focus
ASAAR
> I can shoot a whole wedding with only 2 cards of 4 Gb (but I have more for
> security). If you look at the prices of the 8 or 16 Gb, my goodness! I can
> buy a 160 Gb imagetank and never think again about storage ;-)
> Shooting with one big card is just plain dumb; you're testing (tempting) the
> odds.
Several years ago some said that 512MB cards were too big. I've
purchased dozens of cards from 48MB to 16GB and never had a failure.
For me, buying a 160GB Imagetank would be dumb, especially since a
decent, lightweight NetPC with a 160GB drive, a 10" screen and a 5
or 6 hour battery can be bought for about $300 by those that are
paranoid. Having an assistant copy cards to an Imagetank may be a
reasonable precaution for working pros, but it's a bit excessive for
most casual photographers. At only $18 for 8GB Class 6 SDHC and
$19.50 for 8GB CF cards (Kingston, both from B&H) I've got to wonder
what you're paying that goosed that "my goodness!" out of you? :)
Focus
"ASAAR" <cau...@22.com> wrote in message
news:5pk7o41grke42dv1h...@4ax.com...
Those cards are cheap because they're slow and old models.
Look at the fast ones of Sandisk or Sony and you pay between $100 and $200.-
The imagetank needs no starting up time and you don't need to start an
application, copy the files, etc.
It costs much less than $100.-
But a small notebook might come in handy to see some pictures on location.
--
Focus
Daguerreotype type
<tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote:
All I have at this point are some 1GB SD cards. It really will be
convenient to not hae to swap out those cars all the time. I'll still
have a couple of 1GB cards in the camera case all the time.
Daguerreotype type
>....
>Shooting with one big card is just plain dumb; you're testing (tempting) the
>odds.
I'm not a professional phtographer, I'm not even an amateur
phtographer. Of course I'd really not like to lose photographs because
of a SD card failing on me, but I'd also lioke to not have to swap
cars all the time.
Could people tell me how often they've personally had a SD or SDHC
cards fail on their own, as opposed to getting lost or stepped on or
something?
Daguerreotype type
>
>"ASAAR" <cau...@22.com> wrote in message
>news:5pk7o41grke42dv1h...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 31 Jan 2009 01:08:49 -0000, Focus wrote:
>>
>>> I can shoot a whole wedding with only 2 cards of 4 Gb (but I have more
>>> for
>>> security). If you look at the prices of the 8 or 16 Gb, my goodness! I
>>> can
>>> buy a 160 Gb imagetank and never think again about storage ;-)
>>> Shooting with one big card is just plain dumb; you're testing (tempting)
>>> the
>>> odds.
>>
>> Several years ago some said that 512MB cards were too big. I've
>> purchased dozens of cards from 48MB to 16GB and never had a failure.
>> For me, buying a 160GB Imagetank would be dumb, especially since a
>> decent, lightweight NetPC with a 160GB drive, a 10" screen and a 5
>> or 6 hour battery can be bought for about $300 by those that are
>> paranoid. Having an assistant copy cards to an Imagetank may be a
>> reasonable precaution for working pros, but it's a bit excessive for
>> most casual photographers. At only $18 for 8GB Class 6 SDHC and
>> $19.50 for 8GB CF cards (Kingston, both from B&H) I've got to wonder
>> what you're paying that goosed that "my goodness!" out of you? :)
>
>Those cards are cheap because they're slow and old models.
>Look at the fast ones of Sandisk or Sony and you pay between $100 and $200.-
I have an "old" and slow camera, so I'm probably not going to have to
worry about the speed of the cards. So I've just spent $16.00 for a
Kingston 8GB Secure Digital High Capacity (SDHC) Card - Class 4. I
spent $10 each for 1GB SD cards not all that long ago. I'm just hoping
that it'll work in my camera.
Jürgen Exner
>Shooting with one big card is just plain dumb; you're testing (tempting) the
>odds.
Oh please, how often do memory cards actually fail? How many actual
cases do you know about? And no, "the grandfather of my friend's cousin
third removed heard from a friend..." doesn't count.
Yes, there are faked cards out there. Those you can test for before
using them. And yes, sometimes people manage to break a pin while
inserting them (which actually speaks for avoiding swapping cards). And
yes, they have a maximum write cycle. I am still looking for someone
exceeding that number. And yes, you can accidentally format them,
accidentally delete the photos, corrupt the file system by removing the
card while a write is in progress (another reason not to switch cards),
but all of those are user error.
All in all flash memory cards are pretty much the most reliable
electronic gear imaginable. IMNSHO the risk if loosing photos because
using a large card instead of several smaller cards is vastly
exaggerated.
jue
aquadiver
Indeed. I've even had a digital camera flood in its housing in
seawater, retrieved the card and found it, once dry to have every
photo I had taken in excellent condition. The camera, of course, was
ruined.
gc
tony cooper
I've never had a card go bad. I still prefer to swap out smaller
cards (4 gig) because, if I would step on the card or otherwise
destroy the card, I'd lose one-half, one-third, or one-fourth of my
images and not all of them.
This "all the time"... How frequently would you fill a 4 gig or even
a 1 gig card before uploading the contents? How many shots do you
take in a day?
If you are not a professional, and not on a cruise or something where
you shoot several days without uploading, are you really going to have
to swap out "all the time"?
I don't think it's wrong to use large capacity cards, but I am curious
about the reasoning used.
cbj...@bellsouth.net
> On Sat, 31 Jan 2009 01:08:49 -0000, "Focus" <n...@nowhere.pt> wrote:
>> ....
>> Shooting with one big card is just plain dumb; you're testing (tempting) the
>> odds.
>
>
> Could people tell me how often they've personally had a SD or SDHC
> cards fail on their own, as opposed to getting lost or stepped on or
> something?
I have never had a card "fail". I probably have a dozen or more of
various sized cards. I have had occasional corruption and instances
where the write protect switch fell out. The instance of corruption
occurred while on vacation and all but 3 images were recoverable.
Reformatted the card and am still using it.
Larger cards are more useful if you shoot RAW with high mp cameras. My
D300 gets about 280 photos on an 8G card. I usually keep a 4G or 8G
card in the D300 so that I can shoot RAW if I need. In our cameras
which don't shoot RAW, I use 1G or 2G.
If your camera also shoots video, use the largest card you can afford.
Ron Hunter
then I probably would have filled all the cards I had in one day. I can
certainly see how shooting RAW with a 10 to 12MP camera could eat up
flash cards at a rapid rate, and larger cards may be more convenient.
In addition, the newer, and larger, cards often have better transfer
rates, which means you can shoot more in a shorter time, and save time
downloading to the computer. Imagine having to download 8 GB to the
compute via a USB 1.1 interface....
Wally
>Daguerreotype type wrote:
>> On Sat, 31 Jan 2009 01:08:49 -0000, "Focus" <n...@nowhere.pt> wrote:
>>> ....
>>> Shooting with one big card is just plain dumb; you're testing (tempting) the
>>> odds.
>>
>> Could people tell me how often they've personally had a SD or SDHC
>> cards fail on their own, as opposed to getting lost or stepped on or
>> something?
>
>I have never had a card "fail". I probably have a dozen or more of
>various sized cards. I have had occasional corruption and instances
>where the write protect switch fell out. The instance of corruption
>occurred while on vacation and all but 3 images were recoverable.
>Reformatted the card and am still using it.
>
>Larger cards are more useful if you shoot RAW with high mp cameras. My
>D300 gets about 280 photos on an 8G card. I usually keep a 4G or 8G
>card in the D300 so that I can shoot RAW if I need. In our cameras
>which don't shoot RAW, I use 1G or 2G.
I had a CF card temporarily fail when it was being swapped between two
cameras and a Mac several times. It came back to life by itself later
in my own camera, no pics lost.
Whether you have several small cards or one big one is up to you
(obviously). What is scarier to you, losing pics due to failure of the
card because of some glitch in the card, or losing pics due to
accidents having to do with changing cards?
In my experience it is always an awkward moment when I change cards,
like in a crowded street in a foreign city, or in a field where it
would be bad to drop the card, or at the VERY moment when the nude
model is striking the most provocative poses. So I prefer big cards so
I'm always ready to shoot, and don't have to take it out till I'm
safely at my computer.
What is the chance of failure of the card? Published mean time between
failures seem to be several million hours, and write cycles are around
10,000 to 1,000,000. Sounds pretty safe to me.
I've got a 16 GB card in my XSi. That means I will run out of battery
before I run out of memory. So I bought a spare battery! But most of
the time I am pretty sure I will be home or back at my hotel room to
recharge the battery before it runs out. There is still an advantage
(IMHO) to keeping the same card in the camera for maybe a week or more
when I'm travelling.
Wally
ASAAR
>> At only $18 for 8GB Class 6 SDHC and
>> $19.50 for 8GB CF cards (Kingston, both from B&H) I've got to wonder
>> what you're paying that goosed that "my goodness!" out of you? :)
>
> Those cards are cheap because they're slow and old models.
> Look at the fast ones of Sandisk or Sony and you pay between $100 and $200.-
They weren't cheap back when they were purchased. Did you miss
the "several years ago"? It sure seems like you did, because the
time variable was used to make a point, one which you also missed.
Those older memory cards were the faster/fastest of the available
speeds back then, so you can't really compare them with today's much
higher speed cards. You're spoiled by the performance of today's
high speed memory cards. This is now, that was then, and back then
cameras wouldn't have been able to take advantage of today's high
speed cards if they were available. I gave real prices for real
products that can be easily found (at B&H and also from other
dealers), contrasted with the vagueness of the ones you mentioned.
The Class 6 SDHC cards I listed are more than fast enough for most
cameras. The CF cards may not be the fastest, but you can get very
high speed CF cards for much less than the $100 and $200 cards that
you haven't identified (size, speed, dealer). Maybe you need to go
on a "buying" vacation if flash card prices are abnormally high at
your location. You'd probably have to travel beyond the Azores. :)
whisky-dave
"Daguerreotype type" <nos...@no.invalid> wrote in message
Had one SDHC card fail, well 3 for the 28 images couldn't be copied back
from
the camera, think I used a card reader to get the remaining 25 off as the
camera
couldn;t access any of them It was a 1Gb scandisk, is a HP327, a real chheap
camera
in fact so cheap we got it free with when buying a £60 printer !
Reformated the card and it seems ok.
whisky-dave
"Wally" <Wa...@luxx.com> wrote in message
news:bmveo4l3ravfvhas7...@4ax.com...
> Whether you have several small cards or one big one is up to you
> (obviously). What is scarier to you, losing pics due to failure of the
> card because of some glitch in the card, or losing pics due to
> accidents having to do with changing cards?
>
> In my experience it is always an awkward moment when I change cards,
I used to have a similar problem with film.
> like in a crowded street in a foreign city, or in a field where it
> would be bad to drop the card, or at the VERY moment when the nude
> model is striking the most provocative poses.
I'd probably drop more than the card ;-)
>So I prefer big cards so
> I'm always ready to shoot, and don't have to take it out till I'm
> safely at my computer.
I guess that also applies to the memory card ;-)
> What is the chance of failure of the card? Published mean time between
> failures seem to be several million hours, and write cycles are around
> 10,000 to 1,000,000. Sounds pretty safe to me.
>
> I've got a 16 GB card in my XSi. That means I will run out of battery
> before I run out of memory. So I bought a spare battery! But most of
> the time I am pretty sure I will be home or back at my hotel room to
> recharge the battery before it runs out. There is still an advantage
> (IMHO) to keeping the same card in the camera for maybe a week or more
> when I'm travelling.
>
> Wally
I agree but I like to have a spare card, my prime card 4GB currently is kept
in
the camera an older 1GB card in the shirt pocket, not in case the opther
fails
but in case that nude model pops out and I need extra space. :)
Daguerreotype type
<tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>....
>I've never had a card go bad.
I'm glad to hear it. I'm reading that the cards last a good long
while, it seems. I was remembering when this technology was new and
less featured.
> I still prefer to swap out smaller
>cards (4 gig) because, if I would step on the card or otherwise
>destroy the card, I'd lose one-half, one-third, or one-fourth of my
>images and not all of them.
I only had a collection of 1 GB SD cards. I could fill them up too
often.
>This "all the time"... How frequently would you fill a 4 gig or even
>a 1 gig card before uploading the contents? How many shots do you
>take in a day?
As I said, I'm not even an amateur photographer. I know that I need to
take a bunch of shots in order to get something that might look decent
even to my eye once I get it back on the computer. I have filled up a
1 GB card on occasion.
After hearing about the capacity of my camera on this ng I went and
bought a Kingston 8 GB SDHC for it. I'll keep a 1 GB in the case to
back up if I ever get that one filled up.
>If you are not a professional, and not on a cruise or something where
>you shoot several days without uploading, are you really going to have
>to swap out "all the time"?
Well, too often and sometimes inconveniently.
>I don't think it's wrong to use large capacity cards, but I am curious
>about the reasoning used.
Part of the reasoning may be that I'm lazy and prefer to just shoot
and not worry about having to swap out the card because I've filled it
up. I am unlikely to fill up that 8 GB SDHC while I'm out. It's just
one less thing I'll feel the need to worry about.
Daguerreotype type
>Daguerreotype type wrote:
>> On Sat, 31 Jan 2009 01:08:49 -0000, "Focus" <n...@nowhere.pt> wrote:
>>> ....
>>> Shooting with one big card is just plain dumb; you're testing (tempting) the
>>> odds.
>>
>....
>>
>> Could people tell me how often they've personally had a SD or SDHC
>> cards fail on their own, as opposed to getting lost or stepped on or
>> something?
>
>I have never had a card "fail". I probably have a dozen or more of
>various sized cards. I have had occasional corruption and instances
>where the write protect switch fell out.
Yeah, what can you do if that falls out? I've had them accidentally
switch on as I put them into the computer. If one fell out and locked
the card in a read-only condition I'd be so annoyed.
>....
>If your camera also shoots video, use the largest card you can afford.
It will shoot video. And maybe I'll shoot some now.
Stormin Mormon
on a 4 GB card. Says it needs SDHC, but that doesn't work,
either. I advise to try it. Before I wrote this, others will
have answered your question.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Daguerreotype type" <nos...@no.invalid> wrote in message
news:6aq6o4tcmn3cogq6k...@4ax.com...
David J Taylor
> Mine is a Panasonic. It works on 1 or 2gb, but will not work
> on a 4 GB card. Says it needs SDHC, but that doesn't work,
> either. I advise to try it. Before I wrote this, others will
> have answered your question.
The Panasonic TZ3 I have works perfectly with SDHC cards. It's a camera
from around April 2007. So does the Nikon D60.
But a couple of my PCs don't.....
David
Mike Cawood, HND BIT
news:gn5cnb$g21$1...@news.motzarella.org...
compatibility.
Regards Mike.