Memory Cards...good brands? stay away brands?

wildviper

Hi All,

I am curious to find out which brands have a good reputation and which one deserves good reputation and which is bad?

Lexar, Sandisk, Kingston, PNY, Transcend, Toshiba and others???

Rather than speed, I am more concerned about data corruption more than speed.

run_kmc

I use Sandisk and Kingston without any problems, but you can find people who've had problems with any brand.

More importantly, buy them from a reputable place (I get all of mine from B&H). These things are very popular to counterfeit.

paddler4

I use only Sandisk (Extreme III when I had an XTi, and extreme IV now that I shoot with a 50D) and have never had a single problem with any of them. I also second the suggestion that you buy them only from a reputable dealer. Lost of places that are not authorized sell Sandisk, and it would be hard to know if they are legit. I bought most of mine from B&H.

pathfinder

I have had very good results with Sandisk and Transcend. The only brands I currently carry in my backpack. Off brand CF cards are a very bad gamble.

ziggy53

I use mostly Sandisk and Lexar.

Be aware that there are no industry standards regarding card speeds, so you cannot compare "rated" speeds from manufacturer to manufacturer.

It's much better to rely on empirical speed measurements, like those at Rob Galbraith:

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

To prevent most data corruption my method is to:

Try to never shoot to completely fill the card.
I do not do field image deletions from any card.
Always format the card prior to a shoot in the camera the card will be used in.
If I ever experience a data error of any kind with a card, that card is retired for casual use at best.

Art Scott

I agree wit h Ziggy on how to keep card corruption down to a min........
I started with Lexar and now exclusively use Transcend.......I have used SanDisk, & PNY (by far the worst .....SLOWEST card I ever used....it is now on the bottom of Cheney Lake)......I would have no probs using Lexar or SanDisk again......I ran into recognition probs with Kingston so they are completely out.........
The reason behind my use of Transcend is that I printed off al lthe specs of Lexar and Sandisk and did the cross off all identical spec for each card.....since they had very little variance of any of the specs....then I looked at cost....at the time San Disk and Lexar were between 3-5 times as high as Transcend for the Highest end cards that were speced for really cold and hot working temps......so Transcend got my business..........using 12 8gb cards for 3 cameras................

no card is immune to becoming corrupt.....every card will experience it sometime in it life more likely than not......so just in case I keep a copy of Lexar's IMage Rescue on my computer......at one time it was the only one that would allow for recovery of any and all raw files and jpgs and it gave you options on how to recover........I have had it recover files that had been deleted and formatted over several times.....so it digs deep.

colourbox

wildviper wrote:

I am curious to find out which brands have a good reputation and which one deserves good reputation and which is bad?

Unfortunately, this is very difficult to ascertain reliably, although the big names are usually trustworthy. Data Rescue (makers of Photo Rescue) posted a very interesting comparison and analysis of card quality after buying two cards that should have been the same, and then cracking them open...

http://www.datarescue.com/laboratory/cfcompare/index.htm

So, yes, we can definitely say that marked build quality differences do exist between Compact Flash cards, even when they rely on equivalent components and when they are sold under well known brands...
...The bad news is that you, the consumer, can't tell. The build quality of a compact flash card can only be ascertained by opening it, and that operation is not reversible, at least if you want to continue using the card in your digital camera. Further, there is virtually no guarantee that a specific manufacturer will deliver the same build quality over time. Compact flash cards are often sold in non-descript batches that are simply branded by the vendor. This is why we won't give you the names of the brands involved above: there is no guarantee that different batches or different generation of cards would not reverse the comparison.

Miguel Delinquento

I've used SD cards by Transcend, AData, Lexar, Kingston, and Sandisk Extreme. The two that stand out in terms of physical build quality are the Sandisk and the Lexar. The others are poorly constructed. I've had a Transcend and an AData cards break apart over their normal use.

I only purchase Sandisk and Lexar now.


M

W.W. Webster

SanDisk invented the things, and still manufacture and assemble all their own components including the memory and electronics. Very, very few do.

Joves

I have been using mostly the Sandisk and, have one PNY that I have had no problem with. I have to also agree with Ziggy on how to use them. Most corruptions come from misuse or, incorrect use.

wildviper

I am surprised by Transcend cards. By looking at the card and the imagery, it seems a cheap knock-off. However, the strong support for it here and by reviews on Newegg, it seems it is for real.

I have had SanDisk and have had no issues with it. I just bought a Kodak SDHC card that is made by Lexar. Hopefully those are good.

hgernhardtjr

I, too, strongly agree with Ziggy re deleting and formatting as a simple way to avoid corruption of data ... and while SanDisks have been my mainstay, Transcend produces quality storage and have never given me trouble in both the SD and CF incarnations.

W.W. Webster

wildviper wrote:

I am surprised by Transcend [which] it seems ... is for real.

Rob Galbraith cites a statutory declaration (by Lexar) naming Transcend among a large number of brands which "either resell flash cards purchased from others or assemble cards from controllers and flash memory chips purchased from [other] companies".

Suppliers of such brands can buy their cards or components from anyone, and they can change their suppliers from time to time. Most will never disclose their sources or the relevant manufacturing standards to which these purport to conform as, to do so, might do nothing to enhance the reputation of the branded product.

I want the maximum possible assurance of the reliability of the memory cards I use. Therefore I prefer not to take the risk of using cards comprised of lowest-price-tender components from who-knows-who.

jnsuffolk

lexar sandisk here. Tried pny. had problems

Scott_Quier

ziggy53 wrote:

To prevent most data corruption my method is to:

Try to never shoot to completely fill the card.
I do not do field image deletions from any card.
Always format the card prior to a shoot in the camera the card will be used in.
If I ever experience a data error of any kind with a card, that card is retired for casual use at best.

Cameras use format cards using a variant of the old FAT (File Allocation Table) File System which was used by Microsoft since before the advent of DOS 1.0 - I remember my first encounter with it being sometime in early '80s. Deleting files and then continuing to shoot will lead to fragmentation of the file space on the card which is not such a big deal in and of itself. However, fragementation leads to one more level of complexity and it can often be the straw that brakes your camel's back - resulting in lost clusters, thus lost images.