Need to upgrade my bodies

milepostmilepost Big grinsNorth CarolinaRegistered Users Posts: 22 Big grins
edited August 27, 2015 in Cameras
I've been shooting with two D300 for yeeeears, probably since 2008. I need to upgrade my bodies. I mostly shoot beach portraits. What's the smartest upgrade considering I don't have a ton o money to spend? My sample work http://www.milepostportraits.com/Portraiture/Sample
«1

Comments

  • ziggy53ziggy53 Still learnin'still lovin Super Moderators Posts: 22,192 moderator
    edited August 1, 2015
    The Nikon D7xxx series are very nice prosumer/advanced enthusiast bodies, more than capable for most uses. Compared to the D300 they have expanded dynamic range and much lower high-ISO noise. Lots of professionals using them.

    As long as you don't need the deeper buffer of the D7200, the D7100 is extremely competent and about the best Nikon APS-C/DX body there is (with the D7200 slightly more refined). The dual-card capability is also a comfort for redundancy or doubling storage.

    I also recommend adding speedlights to your gear, if you're not already using them. Adding your own light is a great way to extend shooting hours and the AF-Assist of the better flashes add to autofocus speed and accuracy, amounting to more keepers. thumb.gif
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • milepostmilepost Big grins North CarolinaRegistered Users Posts: 22 Big grins
    edited August 1, 2015
    Thank you for your reply! I will look into that series. What do you mean by "deeper buffer"? These are my lenses, if it makes any difference: AF-S NIKKOR 17.0-55.0 mm f/2.8 and AF-S VR NIKKOR 70.0-200.0 mm f/2.8 - I feel like they've served me well, but should I be looking into another kind of lens for beach portraits? I don't like to swap out lenses at the beach. I would just be shooting two bodies with two lenses the entire time.
  • milepostmilepost Big grins North CarolinaRegistered Users Posts: 22 Big grins
    edited August 1, 2015
    Okay, I read up on camera buffering. I'm a little rusty ;) I'm liking what I'm reading about the D7100.
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Still learnin'still lovin Super Moderators Posts: 22,192 moderator
    edited August 1, 2015
    Those lenses, the Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8G ED-IF AF-S DX and the Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR, are an excellent choice, with the possible addition of a Nikkor 85mm f1.8G AF-S.

    The Nikkor 85mm f1.8G AF-S is a reasonably priced short telephoto lens, and, especially on a DX body, it can produce better background separation "and" allow shooting in less light (compared to your longer zoom). The IF (Internal Focus) means that the lens does not breath in the dust and salt which is often present in a beach environment (much like your 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF in that regard.) Just seems like a good match for your application. No stabilization, so either a tripod or a monopod is indicated when you need a slower shutter speed.


    Yes, I suspect that the Nikon D7100 would be a great choice for your work, although I don't think that the weather seals are quite up to the seals in your D300. (Just an FYI, but I think the D7100 would still be OK to use for a beach application. I do recommend a decent camera bag for the body and lens(es) when not in use, to help with dust and salt.)
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • milepostmilepost Big grins North CarolinaRegistered Users Posts: 22 Big grins
    edited August 1, 2015
    Thanks, Ziggy! I was thinking of getting the 35mm f/1.8 DX. You think I should get the 85mm? Normally I wear both cameras during a shoot. Shoots last 1 to 1.5 hours. I tend to switch back and forth pretty quickly, so I don't keep a bag at the beach.
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Still learnin'still lovin Super Moderators Posts: 22,192 moderator
    edited August 2, 2015
    Review your past images and see what focal lengths you have been using. If you have a style that you are happy with, and if that style is getting you business, then go with the focal length prime lens which best matches. A large aperture prime gives you better light gathering capability, which is one of your stated goals. thumb.gif
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • milepostmilepost Big grins North CarolinaRegistered Users Posts: 22 Big grins
    edited August 2, 2015
    Good point! I shoot mostly with my 70-200mm, even large groups, so it would make more sense to get the 85mm :)
  • NikonsandVstromsNikonsandVstroms *and Olympus Boston, MARegistered Users Posts: 990 Major grins
    edited August 3, 2015
    As long as the small buffer is fine 2 refurbished D7100's might be the way to go at about 650 each they're one of the best deals out there right now.
  • MitchellMitchell Major grins Registered Users Posts: 3,503 Major grins
    edited August 3, 2015
    No thoughts on going full frame?
  • milepostmilepost Big grins North CarolinaRegistered Users Posts: 22 Big grins
    edited August 3, 2015
    Well I made my purchases last night on Adorama. I got two D7100 (one refurbished) and the 85mm. Can't wait to try them out!! Thanks for your help, guys.
  • milepostmilepost Big grins North CarolinaRegistered Users Posts: 22 Big grins
    edited August 11, 2015
    So I got my two D7100 bodies and instantly had to send back the refurbished one (I kept getting "Err" with each shot and the shutter would stay open). I went ahead and ordered another new D7100 to be on the safe side. But, wow, I am not used to such a lag with the buffer! Now I'm thinking I might want to send them both back and get the D7200. OR do you guys have any other suggestions? I think I could probably spend at least $3,000 for two new cameras.
  • milepostmilepost Big grins North CarolinaRegistered Users Posts: 22 Big grins
    edited August 11, 2015
    Maybe the D610?
  • MitchellMitchell Major grins Registered Users Posts: 3,503 Major grins
    edited August 11, 2015
    Mitchell wrote: »
    No thoughts on going full frame?

    Any thoughts on going full frame?
  • milepostmilepost Big grins North CarolinaRegistered Users Posts: 22 Big grins
    edited August 11, 2015
    Mitchell wrote: »
    Any thoughts on going full frame?


    I have no thoughts on full frame, I'm not really sure on the difference. What are your thoughts? :)
  • milepostmilepost Big grins North CarolinaRegistered Users Posts: 22 Big grins
    edited August 11, 2015
    I've been trying to read up more on going full frame. Never really thought about it before. I just read this article: D610 vs D7100. "Stepping up to full-frame is a big decision, and even though the D610 is Nikon’s most ‘affordable’ FX format camera (assuming it replaces the D600), it’s still a major investment – especially when you take new lenses into account. But we think full-frame is still the way to go for all-out quality, and if that’s the way you feel too, then we think the D610 is the better choice. However – and this is the most important point – the D7100 does offer a serious an upgrade choice for those who’ve outgrown their D3000- or D5000- series camera, or whose D90 or D300s has just got too long in the tooth.
    Full frame cameras like the D610 may be more affordable than they were before, but the counter-argument is that thanks to the D7100’s excellent sensor, the need to go full frame has diminished." HMM. So since my current lenses are DX, they won't work on a D610?
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Still learnin'still lovin Super Moderators Posts: 22,192 moderator
    edited August 12, 2015
    milepost wrote: »
    I've been trying to read up more on going full frame. Never really thought about it before. ... HMM. So since my current lenses are DX, they won't work on a D610?

    Your Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR is a very capable FX lens and would work fine on a Nikon FX/FF body. The Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8G ED-IF AF-S DX would be more problematic and you would probably want to get an FX standard zoom instead.


    Per your post above, "... wow, I am not used to such a lag with the buffer!", you might try shooting with just one card in the camera and setting the camera to lossy 12 bit NEF/RAW capture. Also, purchase a SanDisk Extreme PRO 32GB UHS-I/U3 SDHC card as this is one of the Nikon recommended cards for the D7100:

    https://support.nikonusa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/18248/~/approved-memory-cards---d7100

    ... and because users report very good success with that card in the Nikon D7100:

    http://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/RTRGNYMFL6XUE/ref=cm_cr_pr_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B007NDL56A

    The Nikon D7100 does have a very small image buffer and only a single SD card controller, so with two cards set as redundant storage it cuts the effective transfer speed in half. Using a single card uses the full card controller speed and the lossy 12 bit NEF/RAW capture setting produces smaller file sizes. (Most folks don't notice any difference between the lossy 12 bit NEF/RAW files and lossless 14 bit NEF/RAW files in practical use.)
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • milepostmilepost Big grins North CarolinaRegistered Users Posts: 22 Big grins
    edited August 12, 2015
    Thanks for the suggestions, Ziggy. I will try them out! I really don't want to return them, so I hope it works out. Thanks again.
  • milepostmilepost Big grins North CarolinaRegistered Users Posts: 22 Big grins
    edited August 12, 2015
    So if I'm reading this right, if I have two cards in, even if I have card 2 set as "overflow" (not redundant), it still slows the camera down?
  • MitchellMitchell Major grins Registered Users Posts: 3,503 Major grins
    edited August 12, 2015
    milepost wrote: »
    I have no thoughts on full frame, I'm not really sure on the difference. What are your thoughts? :)

    My thoughts? You will be blown away by the difference between these DX bodies and any full frame camera (FX).

    You already own one of the finest zoom lenses which is compatible with FX bodies. I've looked at your site and style. I would shoot 90% of your photos with the 70-200, f2.8 lens. I would get something wider for larger groups.

    You have many choices. If you are willing to buy used, there are many low mileage D700 bodies available. I love that camera even though it's been out for years. Really Nikon's first affordable FX body. I still enjoy shooting mine today. Willing to spend a bit more, there are loads of lightly used D800 or D800e bodies available since many gear heads have upgraded to the D810. My D800e is the finest camera I have ever used.

    You are currently shooting a D300. I own one also (embarassing how many bodies I own). The build quality on the D300 is much better than all of the pro-sumer DX bodies you are looking at. You're a professional. If you want your bodies to withstand professional abuse and the exposure you give your equipment on the beach, you will likely prefer the better build quality.

    Pick up a used D700. You will instantly feel comfortable. Almost identical button and function layout to your D300. You would pick it up and start shooting in less than a minute without missing a beat. You could also continue to use all of your existing CF cards.
  • NikonsandVstromsNikonsandVstroms *and Olympus Boston, MARegistered Users Posts: 990 Major grins
    edited August 12, 2015
    milepost wrote: »
    So I got my two D7100 bodies and instantly had to send back the refurbished one (I kept getting "Err" with each shot and the shutter would stay open). I went ahead and ordered another new D7100 to be on the safe side. But, wow, I am not used to such a lag with the buffer! Now I'm thinking I might want to send them both back and get the D7200. OR do you guys have any other suggestions? I think I could probably spend at least $3,000 for two new cameras.

    What kind of memory cards are you using? Having a fast SD card really matters in the D7100 due to its smaller buffer/large file sizes and it can be a night and day experience compared to a slower one in both shooting and image review.

    The spec that matters in this case is the write speed but that can take a little digging. In a lot of cards the read speed significantly higher than the write speed and they only advertise/display the read speed on the card. For example SanDisk and Lexar both sell "95 MB/s" cards, but for the write speeds Sandisk's is 90 MB/s while Lexar only does 45 MB/s.

    But if you give the brand and all the info on the front (write speed, or if older and it uses #x) it shouldn't be too hard to google it.
  • NikonsandVstromsNikonsandVstroms *and Olympus Boston, MARegistered Users Posts: 990 Major grins
    edited August 13, 2015
    Mitchell wrote: »
    My thoughts? You will be blown away by the difference between these DX bodies and any full frame camera (FX).

    You already own one of the finest zoom lenses which is compatible with FX bodies. I've looked at your site and style. I would shoot 90% of your photos with the 70-200, f2.8 lens. I would get something wider for larger groups.

    You have many choices. If you are willing to buy used, there are many low mileage D700 bodies available. I love that camera even though it's been out for years. Really Nikon's first affordable FX body. I still enjoy shooting mine today. Willing to spend a bit more, there are loads of lightly used D800 or D800e bodies available since many gear heads have upgraded to the D810. My D800e is the finest camera I have ever used.

    You are currently shooting a D300. I own one also (embarassing how many bodies I own). The build quality on the D300 is much better than all of the pro-sumer DX bodies you are looking at. You're a professional. If you want your bodies to withstand professional abuse and the exposure you give your equipment on the beach, you will likely prefer the better build quality.

    Pick up a used D700. You will instantly feel comfortable. Almost identical button and function layout to your D300. You would pick it up and start shooting in less than a minute without missing a beat. You could also continue to use all of your existing CF cards.

    As someone who owns and regularly shoots with both the D700 and D7100 I would advise against this. The D700 is a very solid camera but the images from the D7100 are much nicer in terms dynamic range (1.5 stops) and resolution (2x the D700's) the D700 usually is my secondary body and only becomes the primary when I need a razor thin depth of field or ISO 3,200 and above color shots. The D7100 at 3,200 is fine but there starts to be a noticeable improvement at that point and more so at 6,400.

    If I was going Full Frame and AF wasn't a big issue the D610 (or any of the other 24/36MP FX Nikons) would be a good camera, it's sensor essentially gives you another leap like the D7100 over the D700's dynamic range but you also get better low light performance.

    And I don't know if it's that increased dynamic range or something else about the D7100's sensor but its' images have an "X factor" that reminds me of my old Fuji S5 Pro and while I loved its low light performance the D700 just never had it.
  • milepostmilepost Big grins North CarolinaRegistered Users Posts: 22 Big grins
    edited August 13, 2015
    I was really starting to question my D7100 purchase and did not want to have to send back two cameras. BUT if getting some really fast cards will fix the lag, then I'm all for it. I read this article Fastest Cards Money Can Buy. So if it's right, then SanDisk Extreme PRO UHS-II cards will be good. I really like the idea of going full frame, now that I've read more about it, but I can't worry about getting more lenses right now (I use a Tokina 12-24mm F4 DX when shooting interiors). I like my new Nikon 85mm too, and have been shooting with that at my beach portraits instead of my 70-200mm. So maybe in a few years I'll go that route of upgrading to full frame, but for now I'm going to stick with my D7100 and get new cards. Thanks for all of the awesome advice, guys!
  • NikonsandVstromsNikonsandVstroms *and Olympus Boston, MARegistered Users Posts: 990 Major grins
    edited August 13, 2015
    milepost wrote: »
    I was really starting to question my D7100 purchase and did not want to have to send back two cameras. BUT if getting some really fast cards will fix the lag, then I'm all for it. I read this article Fastest Cards Money Can Buy. So if it's right, then SanDisk Extreme PRO UHS-II cards will be good. I really like the idea of going full frame, now that I've read more about it, but I can't worry about getting more lenses right now (I use a Tokina 12-24mm F4 DX when shooting interiors). I like my new Nikon 85mm too, and have been shooting with that at my beach portraits instead of my 70-200mm. So maybe in a few years I'll go that route of upgrading to full frame, but for now I'm going to stick with my D7100 and get new cards. Thanks for all of the awesome advice, guys!

    Just a quick heads up, the D7100 can't use UHS II speeds, but the good news is that the fastest UHS I sandisk cards are less than half the cost of those ones in your link. Also I found in another forum post that in UHS I mode that card only has 50 MB/s speed compared to the cheaper cards 90 MB/s. I'll double check this right now but wanted to post this ASAP in case you're about to order those cards.
  • NikonsandVstromsNikonsandVstroms *and Olympus Boston, MARegistered Users Posts: 990 Major grins
    edited August 14, 2015
    I found another source which tested it to back up their findings, the UHS II card you linked to would max out at 50 MB/s and they have a D7100 test on there, it only got 38.2 MB/s.

    http://www.cameramemoryspeed.com/reviews/sd-cards/sandisk-extreme-pro-280-mbs-uhs-ii-32gb-sdhc-memory-card/

    This link has all the cards listed and their speeds, the Sandisk I was talking about is ~70 MB/s (slight variations from cards) and there's a Lexar which narrowly edges it out by < 1 MB/s so you likely wont notice that though it is a UHS II card and comes with its own USB reader that can handle it, the main advantage is that it will be faster uploading images. Though if you don't have an SSD you'll be limited by the hard drive which will take away most of that speed increase, and the Lexar is twice as expensive. But for using the camera since the speeds are roughly identical you should see equal performance between the Sandisk and Lexar.

    http://www.cameramemoryspeed.com/nikon-d7100/fastest-sd-card-tests/

    And since you linked to B&H here's the Sandisk (~53 dollars for 64 GB):
    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/824149-REG/SanDisk_SDSDXPA_064G_A75_Extreme_Pro_64GB_SDHC_SDXC.html

    And the Lexar (~100 dollars for 64 GB):
    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1090748-REG/lexar_lsd64gcrbna2000r_pro_2000x_uhs_2.html

    Another card which is almost as fast at 67 MB/s and a good bit cheaper than the Sandisk is Samsung's SD Pro card, they're not sold through B&H so here it is on Amazon (~30 dollars for 64 GB):
    http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-64GB-SDXC-Memory-Card/dp/B00IVPU6BY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1439525474&sr=8-1&keywords=sd+pro+samsung

    Sorry about not getting this all out to you at once I was planning to look at the card you are currently using and then give some suggestions at different price points.

    And I can't personally comment on the reliability of the Samsung or Lexar cards as I've only used Sandisk and Transcend (I've never had an issue with either) though both look to get a vast majority of positive reviews.
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Still learnin'still lovin Super Moderators Posts: 22,192 moderator
    edited August 14, 2015
    milepost wrote: »
    I was really starting to question my D7100 purchase and did not want to have to send back two cameras. BUT if getting some really fast cards will fix the lag, then I'm all for it. I read this article Fastest Cards Money Can Buy. So if it's right, then SanDisk Extreme PRO UHS-II cards will be good. I really like the idea of going full frame, now that I've read more about it, but I can't worry about getting more lenses right now (I use a Tokina 12-24mm F4 DX when shooting interiors). I like my new Nikon 85mm too, and have been shooting with that at my beach portraits instead of my 70-200mm. So maybe in a few years I'll go that route of upgrading to full frame, but for now I'm going to stick with my D7100 and get new cards. Thanks for all of the awesome advice, guys!
    Just a quick heads up, the D7100 can't use UHS II speeds, but the good news is that the fastest UHS I sandisk cards are less than half the cost of those ones in your link. Also I found in another forum post that in UHS I mode that card only has 50 MB/s speed compared to the cheaper cards 90 MB/s. I'll double check this right now but wanted to post this ASAP in case you're about to order those cards.
    I found another source which tested it to back up their findings, the UHS II card you linked to would max out at 50 MB/s and they have a D7100 test on there, it only got 38.2 MB/s.

    http://www.cameramemoryspeed.com/reviews/sd-cards/sandisk-extreme-pro-280-mbs-uhs-ii-32gb-sdhc-memory-card/

    This link has all the cards listed and their speeds, the Sandisk I was talking about is ~70 MB/s (slight variations from cards) and there's a Lexar which narrowly edges it out by < 1 MB/s so you likely wont notice that though it is a UHS II card and comes with its own USB reader that can handle it, the main advantage is that it will be faster uploading images. Though if you don't have an SSD you'll be limited by the hard drive which will take away most of that speed increase, and the Lexar is twice as expensive. But for using the camera since the speeds are roughly identical you should see equal performance between the Sandisk and Lexar.

    http://www.cameramemoryspeed.com/nikon-d7100/fastest-sd-card-tests/

    And since you linked to B&H here's the Sandisk (~53 dollars for 64 GB):
    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/824149-REG/SanDisk_SDSDXPA_064G_A75_Extreme_Pro_64GB_SDHC_SDXC.html

    And the Lexar (~100 dollars for 64 GB):
    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1090748-REG/lexar_lsd64gcrbna2000r_pro_2000x_uhs_2.html

    Another card which is almost as fast at 67 MB/s and a good bit cheaper than the Sandisk is Samsung's SD Pro card, they're not sold through B&H so here it is on Amazon (~30 dollars for 64 GB):
    http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-64GB-SDXC-Memory-Card/dp/B00IVPU6BY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1439525474&sr=8-1&keywords=sd+pro+samsung

    Sorry about not getting this all out to you at once I was planning to look at the card you are currently using and then give some suggestions at different price points.

    And I can't personally comment on the reliability of the Samsung or Lexar cards as I've only used Sandisk and Transcend (I've never had an issue with either) though both look to get a vast majority of positive reviews.

    User "NikonsandVstroms" is correct; the Nikon D7100 body does not support UHS II. Worse, a UHS II card will revert to UHS I speeds or slower in that body.

    I highly recommend trying a single SanDisk Extreme PRO 32GB UHS-I/U3 SDHC to confirm to yourself that it can produce a suitable result, then test other cards against that card.

    For me, I'm sticking with the SanDisk Extreme PRO 32GB UHS-I/U3 SDHC cards as I truly believe that they provide the best combination of security (least reported failures in the D7100), excellent transfer speed and cost. That combination of useful qualities, and in that order, represents tremendous value.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • NikonsandVstromsNikonsandVstroms *and Olympus Boston, MARegistered Users Posts: 990 Major grins
    edited August 14, 2015
    ziggy53 wrote: »
    User "NikonsandVstroms" is correct; the Nikon D7100 body does not support UHS II. Worse, a UHS II card will revert to UHS I speeds or slower in that body.

    I highly recommend trying a single SanDisk Extreme PRO 32GB UHS-I/U3 SDHC to confirm to yourself that it can produce a suitable result, then test other cards against that card.

    For me, I'm sticking with the SanDisk Extreme PRO 32GB UHS-I/U3 SDHC cards as I truly believe that they provide the best combination of security (least reported failures in the D7100), excellent transfer speed and cost. That combination of useful qualities, and in that order, represents tremendous value.

    Ziggy, where did you find reports of failure rates in the D7100? I actually needed a new SD card myself and that Samsung Pro 90 MB/s was cheap enough to be an impulse purchase and the few bad reviews seemed to be the standard rare DOA or soon after, and people buying them for incompatible cameras.
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Still learnin'still lovin Super Moderators Posts: 22,192 moderator
    edited August 14, 2015
    ziggy53 wrote: »
    ... For me, I'm sticking with the SanDisk Extreme PRO 32GB UHS-I/U3 SDHC cards as I truly believe that they provide the best combination of security (least reported failures in the D7100), excellent transfer speed and cost. That combination of useful qualities, and in that order, represents tremendous value.
    Ziggy, where did you find reports of failure rates in the D7100? I actually needed a new SD card myself and that Samsung Pro 90 MB/s was cheap enough to be an impulse purchase and the few bad reviews seemed to be the standard rare DOA or soon after, and people buying them for incompatible cameras.

    I use a simple algorithm of my own design to make that determination. Weighting factors are:

    1) Manufacturing sales rank for NAND flash producers (SanDisk is ranked #3 by DRAMeXchange, after Samsung and Toshiba. DRAMeXchange shows SanDisk sales @ $1.590 Billion USD.)

    Lexar is now owned by Micron, so I use a guestimate to calculate the Lexar percentage from the total sales. Regardless, Micron has smaller sales than Sandisk.

    I only research SanDisk, Lexar/Micron, Toshiba and Samsung. The other brands only purchase parts from other manufacturers, assemble and market cards.

    The sales figures indicate a comparative number for each manufacturer.

    2) Google rank for the terms:
    [card name] Nikon D7100 failure or problem or error

    ... Where [card name] is replaced by the name of the memory card(s) in the comparison.

    This Google search will return some useful data and increasing non-useful data as the search progresses, so I manually count, looking for applicable posts, stopping when I count a larger percentage of inapplicable posts. (Somewhat arbitrary)


    The two above figures are divided, yielding a simple estimated metric of posted card failures per unit sales. While I admit that the data is subject to some interpretation (subjective analysis of the Google search and guessing the percentage of Micron's sales, for instance), I do avail myself of all public data I can find to make those interpretations.

    The Google searches also return relatively small amounts of pertinent data, meaning that many people probably accept card failures, problems or errors, without complaining on the Internet about it, or they complain in a fashion which makes it difficult to search for. (For instance complaining about this or that memory card without giving specific card details will not result in a "count" in my searching criteria.)


    When I make a specific "card recommendation", I take into account the above ranking as well as card warranty information.

    For instance, Transcend often uses Samsung chips in its SD cards, but Samsung only offers warranty periods of 5 and 10 years for their cards, while Transcend has a Lifetime warranty on their cards (but prior to 2006 it was 5 years), all of which leads me to say "wha ...". headscratch.gif

    http://www.samsung.com/uk/support/warranty/Support_warranty.html
    http://www.transcend-info.com/warranty

    I also cannot recommend a product which can vary over time in internal components, knowing that both compatibility and speed may be compromised.

    However, ...

    I have purchased Transcend cards for personal use in both CF and SD form factors and I was generally pleased with both performance and durability, but I will not use them for client/paying work.

    I will also say that I have had occasional card failures with even SanDisk and Lexar brand cards, but I have never had a total failure (so far) with either of those brands. Failures were of the occasional type and limited to individual files.

    My experience with Kingston cards was a catastrophic failure, leading to a total loss of all files on the card, fortunately nothing important or for a client. Never again.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • Brett1000Brett1000 Major grins https://www.flickr.com/photos/photoscw/Registered Users Posts: 819 Major grins
    edited August 14, 2015
    ziggy53 wrote: »
    I use a simple algorithm of my own design to make that determination. Weighting factors are:

    1) Manufacturing sales rank for NAND flash producers (SanDisk is ranked #3 by DRAMeXchange, after Samsung and Toshiba. DRAMeXchange shows SanDisk sales @ $1.590 Billion USD.)

    Lexar is now owned by Micron, so I use a guestimate to calculate the Lexar percentage from the total sales. Regardless, Micron has smaller sales than Sandisk.

    I only research SanDisk, Lexar/Micron, Toshiba and Samsung. The other brands only purchase parts from other manufacturers, assemble and market cards.

    The sales figures indicate a comparative number for each manufacturer.

    2) Google rank for the terms:
    [card name] Nikon D7100 failure or problem or error

    ... Where [card name] is replaced by the name of the memory card(s) in the comparison.

    This Google search will return some useful data and increasing non-useful data as the search progresses, so I manually count, looking for applicable posts, stopping when I count a larger percentage of inapplicable posts. (Somewhat arbitrary)


    The two above figures are divided, yielding a simple estimated metric of posted card failures per unit sales. While I admit that the data is subject to some interpretation (subjective analysis of the Google search and guessing the percentage of Micron's sales, for instance), I do avail myself of all public data I can find to make those interpretations.

    The Google searches also return relatively small amounts of pertinent data, meaning that many people probably accept card failures, problems or errors, without complaining on the Internet about it, or they complain in a fashion which makes it difficult to search for. (For instance complaining about this or that memory card without giving specific card details will not result in a "count" in my searching criteria.)


    When I make a specific "card recommendation", I take into account the above ranking as well as card warranty information.

    For instance, Transcend often uses Samsung chips in its SD cards, but Samsung only offers warranty periods of 5 and 10 years for their cards, while Transcend has a Lifetime warranty on their cards (but prior to 2006 it was 5 years), all of which leads me to say "wha ...". headscratch.gif

    http://www.samsung.com/uk/support/warranty/Support_warranty.html
    http://www.transcend-info.com/warranty

    I also cannot recommend a product which can vary over time in internal components, knowing that both compatibility and speed may be compromised.

    However, ...

    I have purchased Transcend cards for personal use in both CF and SD form factors and I was generally pleased with both performance and durability, but I will not use them for client/paying work.

    I will also say that I have had occasional card failures with even SanDisk and Lexar brand cards, but I have never had a total failure (so far) with either of those brands. Failures were of the occasional type and limited to individual files.

    My experience with Kingston cards was a catastrophic failure, leading to a total loss of all files on the card, fortunately nothing important or for a client. Never again.

    a simple algorithm !

    my algorithm is to buy sandisk 32GB refurbished memory cards on ebay for $5
    they have never failed
  • milepostmilepost Big grins North CarolinaRegistered Users Posts: 22 Big grins
    edited August 18, 2015
    Oh wow, thanks for all the info! Okay, so it seems like, according to Ziggy and the speed chart NikonsandVstroms linked to, that SanDisk Extreme PRO 32GB UHS-I/U3 SDHC is the way to go. I already have two (unopened, unused) Lexar 2x 32GB Professional 633x Class 10 UHS-I U3 SDHC (95MB/s transfer 45MB/s write) cards that I was going to return to get faster cards (before NikonsandVstroms said UHS-II wouldn't work for me). BUT it sounds like the Lexar are on par with the SanDisk cards. Is that correct? If so, I will just keep these. Also, even if I have two cards in the camera and I'm using the second slot for overflow only, will it still slow down my shooting?
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Still learnin'still lovin Super Moderators Posts: 22,192 moderator
    edited August 18, 2015
    What kind of memory cards are you using? Having a fast SD card really matters in the D7100 due to its smaller buffer/large file sizes and it can be a night and day experience compared to a slower one in both shooting and image review.

    The spec that matters in this case is the write speed but that can take a little digging. In a lot of cards the read speed significantly higher than the write speed and they only advertise/display the read speed on the card. For example SanDisk and Lexar both sell "95 MB/s" cards, but for the write speeds Sandisk's is 90 MB/s while Lexar only does 45 MB/s.

    But if you give the brand and all the info on the front (write speed, or if older and it uses #x) it shouldn't be too hard to google it.
    milepost wrote: »
    Oh wow, thanks for all the info! Okay, so it seems like, according to Ziggy and the speed chart NikonsandVstroms linked to, that SanDisk Extreme PRO 32GB UHS-I/U3 SDHC is the way to go. I already have two (unopened, unused) Lexar 2x 32GB Professional 633x Class 10 UHS-I U3 SDHC (95MB/s transfer 45MB/s write) cards that I was going to return to get faster cards (before NikonsandVstroms said UHS-II wouldn't work for me). BUT it sounds like the Lexar are on par with the SanDisk cards. Is that correct? If so, I will just keep these. Also, even if I have two cards in the camera and I'm using the second slot for overflow only, will it still slow down my shooting?

    As user "NikonsandVstroms" pointed out previously, the Sandisk card I recommended, and the one I purchased for myself, is twice the write speed of the Lexar you purchased.

    This seems to be confirmed in this thread at Amazon

    "Sporty says:
    The 95MB/s is the read speed only, the write speed is lower on these 633x cards. The write speed is what will affect the camera. Other cards such as the SanDisk Extreme Pro 95MB/s card can reach over 90MB/s write speed. In some cameras it does not matter, but the D7100 and D750 can take advantage of the extra write speed [of the SanDisk Extreme PRO 32GB UHS-I/U3 SDHC cards]."


    I only have a single SanDisk Extreme PRO 32GB UHS-I/U3 SDHC card for the moment, so I can't test for transfer speeds with multiple cards, either writing in parallel or consecutively. I am very happy using that card along with setting up the D7100 camera for lossy 12 bit NEF files. Buffer clearing is very acceptable, but, since I rarely shoot more than a burst of 3 images, buffer clearing is momentary.


    As I understand it, the 12 bit lossy format is only really a problem if you need to "push process" a low ISO image to recover an underexposure. Even then I tested recovering to 3-stops and it works fine. If you try a 6-stop recovery, you will experience banding and posterization of the shadow and low tones, unless you use another RAW image processor, like RawTherapee, which has a "Line Noise Filter" which works rather well with most cameras which have similar banding issues.

    http://betterfamilyphotos.blogspot.com/2013/04/nikon-d5200-and-d7100-band-aid.html

    Look under the "BANDING THERAPY" section of the article.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Sign In or Register to comment.