Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Learning
Photography Q&A
AS card question
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="editorial_use_only" data-source="post: 703810" data-attributes="member: 40895"><p>I do use my cards in a way that is vaguely like that. But it's based on the performance needs for the subject, not just because it's a different subject per se.</p><p></p><p>I have two sets of cards: high write speed, slow write speed. If you are shooting action, like a sports event or something with bursts of action, then a card that clears your camera's buffer more quickly is desirable. That's when I use the high write speed cards. The lower write speed cards are in my bag as backup, if I run out of space. Portrait, tabletop, architecture, street -- there's never a buffer issue for those subjects, so no need for a card with a high write speed. So I swap. The high speed cards are backup, the lower speed cards are in the camera.</p><p></p><p>Memory cards have a life cycle. What the stats are on how many write cycles before failure I don't know. I've never had a card fail that way, but other photographers apparently have. I'd never had a piece of gear fail in the field during a shoot. And then one day I did. So, two things. One is, no need to use an expensive fast card when it isn't necessary. If you are shooting subjects like portraits or architecture, you could probably stick with lower write speed cards. That saves money. Two, after a couple of years, you might buy a new card to mix in to your rotation. Particularly if you have a dual-slot camera. That way you don't have two cards that are the same age with the same number of write cycles in your camera at the same time. Whatever the stats are on cycles to failure, you're playing the odds better.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="editorial_use_only, post: 703810, member: 40895"] I do use my cards in a way that is vaguely like that. But it's based on the performance needs for the subject, not just because it's a different subject per se. I have two sets of cards: high write speed, slow write speed. If you are shooting action, like a sports event or something with bursts of action, then a card that clears your camera's buffer more quickly is desirable. That's when I use the high write speed cards. The lower write speed cards are in my bag as backup, if I run out of space. Portrait, tabletop, architecture, street -- there's never a buffer issue for those subjects, so no need for a card with a high write speed. So I swap. The high speed cards are backup, the lower speed cards are in the camera. Memory cards have a life cycle. What the stats are on how many write cycles before failure I don't know. I've never had a card fail that way, but other photographers apparently have. I'd never had a piece of gear fail in the field during a shoot. And then one day I did. So, two things. One is, no need to use an expensive fast card when it isn't necessary. If you are shooting subjects like portraits or architecture, you could probably stick with lower write speed cards. That saves money. Two, after a couple of years, you might buy a new card to mix in to your rotation. Particularly if you have a dual-slot camera. That way you don't have two cards that are the same age with the same number of write cycles in your camera at the same time. Whatever the stats are on cycles to failure, you're playing the odds better. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Learning
Photography Q&A
AS card question
Top