Which SD cards are best for the Epson R-D1?

[Scott209]

Hello,

Does anyone have experience with different speed SD cards in the R-D1?

I'm currently using a Lexar Professional 1GB 133x cards with excellent results.

However, I am considering buying another 1GB or 2GB card.

Does this camera take advantage of advanced card features to maximize data transfer? For example, is my Lexar Professional 1GB 133x card any faster in this camera than the less expensive 40x Platinum SD or 60x Platinum II SD card? The same question could be asked of Sandisk Ultra II versus Sandisk Extreme III SD cards.

As has been previously discussed, this camera has a small buffer and there would be some advantage to using a faster SD card. However, why use an extremly fast and more expensive card if the camera's data transfer rate is the limiting factor?

I wonder about this since SD card technology has progressed significantly since the introduction of the R-D1. If there is no advantage to the newer faster cards in the R-D1, we could all save a bit of money by using the older cheaper cards!

Thanks for your help!

Scott

P.S. for those of you who also use compact flash in other digital cameras, there is a wonderfully informative review by card and camera at Rob Galbraith's website:

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007

 

[Benjamin Marks]

I had heard that tranfer rates concerned transfer-to-computer, not written-from-the-camera . . .anyone else know for sure?

 

[saxshooter]

I think if you put a standard blue Sandisk 1Gb card into the camera you may notice a speed difference in camera to card writing. But yes, there comes a point where the camera will not dump data to the card any faster (not sure what that point is) but if you are talking 1gb cards, you will notice a difference in speed of transferring 1gb of data between the "non speed rated" card and the faster ones.

 

[fgianni]

So far the SanDisk Extreme III is the only card I will consider buying, but I hear Lexar is catching up.

 

[RML]

I, too, use the Sandisk Extreme III cards, with excellent results. But I would assume to have similar results from similar "pro" cards from Lexar or Kingston.

 

[Mark Norton]

Can we have some benchmarks please. I'm using a generic card, shooting raw, 1/2000 second, lens cap on, LED is on for 5.5 seconds. How is it for you?

 

[LCT]

... I'm using a generic card, shooting raw, 1/2000 second, lens cap on, LED is on for 5.5 seconds...

Good idea, Mark.
Same result with Sandisk Ultra II (1GB), Sandisk Extreme III (1GB) & Transcend 150x (2GB): 5 seconds.
12 seconds with an old 256MB Leica.
Best,
LCT

 

[Mark Norton]

My card is a cheap 1Gb generic card, "Viking Interworks" so if a Sandisk Extreme doesn't beat it, it looks likely the camera is the bottleneck, not the card.

 

[LCT]

...the camera is the bottleneck...

Quite obvious.
Suffice it to compare with modern DSLRs.
Best,
LCT

 

[Mark Norton]

Not very impressive compared to a burst of 10 raw shots on a D2X written to SanDisk Extreme III CF in 16 seconds from start to finish.

 

[LCT]

Even a mere D70 is much faster than the R-D1.
Main weakness (with QC...) of that otherwise great camera IMHO.
Best,
LCT

 

[Donald Mann]

Quality!

Quality!

Not very impressive compared to a burst of 10 raw shots on a D2X written to SanDisk Extreme III CF in 16 seconds from start to finish.

Quality not quantity! 🙂

 

[Sumo_du_Jour]

This topic pops up on DSLR forums. The camera hardware has a maximum bus throughput speed, adequate for card technology at the time of initial release. That spec is leapfrogged by the current evolution of cards and writing becomes a bottleneck under load.

Haven't seen this spec mentioned for the RD1. It could be similar to the throughput speed of a Nikon model of the same release era (is it already a couple of years ago?).

 

[williamhu99]

I had heard that tranfer rates concerned transfer-to-computer, not written-from-the-camera . . .anyone else know for sure?

Yes, the speed of card is usually measured with PC and under Win2000 platform. So the data 133x or 150x speed is measured under PC+Win2000. And it is for READ speed, not WRITE speed.
The performance of storing picture from camera to the card is limited by 2 factors:
1. Camera processing power.
2. Memory card WRITE speed.
For a very fast camera, the performance will be limited by the card.
For a normal case camera, I believe mostly will be limited by the camera.

 

[Scott209]

Bump...

I started this thread some time ago and would like to thank everyone for their input. Also, I would like to share some recently discovered information to help provide a more definitive answer to my original question. Here is a link to a website where the actual speeds of various SD cards were tested on the R-D1.

Hope this is of some use to others.

http://www.neilduffin.co.uk/articles/digital_photography/rd1_card_speeds.html

Scott

 

[pfogle]

Bump...

I started this thread some time ago and would like to thank everyone for their input. Also, I would like to share some recently discovered information to help provide a more definitive answer to my original question. Here is a link to a website where the actual speeds of various SD cards were tested on the R-D1.

Hope this is of some use to others.

http://www.neilduffin.co.uk/articles/digital_photography/rd1_card_speeds.html

Scott

In real world use, I notice I don't have to wait for the buffer since the upgrade. Does anyone know, is this because the buffer is bigger, or is the throughput faster?

 

[williamhu99]

In real world use, I notice I don't have to wait for the buffer since the upgrade. Does anyone know, is this because the buffer is bigger, or is the throughput faster?

The firmware upgrade can not change the buffer size. Buffer size is hardware. I think it is due to the throughput faster to reduce the saving time.