re: Extreme, Ultra and plain jane CF cards

Can someone explain to me in simple terms the difference between the Extreme, Ultra and ordinary CF cards ? I know Ultra and Extreme are faster write cards, but if you don't shoot RAW, sports ,bursts, or kids at plaly, or need fast download, is there any compelling reason to use the Extreme or Ultra cards ? Also, is the main difference between the "II" and "III" types mainly speed ?

Thanks...carolyn
--
Ranger a.k.a chammett
http://www.pbase.com/chammett

'elegance is simplicity'

Can someone explain to me in simple terms the difference between the Extreme, Ultra and ordinary CF cards ? I know Ultra and Extreme are faster write cards, but if you don't shoot RAW, sports ,bursts, or kids at plaly, or need fast download, is there any compelling reason to use the Extreme or Ultra cards ? Also, is the main difference between the "II" and "III" types mainly speed ?
Thanks...carolyn

Speed and "reliability". Truthfully, if you don't need the things you stated, you wouldn't really need the Ultra II or the Extreme III. However, consider that the price difference isn't too much, I'd suggest an Kingston Elite Pro.
--
Canon

c.hammett said:

Can someone explain to me in simple terms the difference between
the Extreme, Ultra and ordinary CF cards ? I know Ultra and
Extreme are faster write cards, but if you don't shoot RAW, sports
,bursts, or kids at plaly, or need fast download, is there any
compelling reason to use the Extreme or Ultra cards ? Also, is
the main difference between the "II" and "III" types mainly speed ?

Click to expand...

Yes, type III is faster. You will see a difference if you shoot numerous continuous images. My opinion is that you will not notice a difference while taking pictures. If you have a high speed reader, you might get the images off of the memory cards faster. The primary purpose of the Extreme cards, however, is that that should be more durable. If you intend to shoot in temperature extremes or under other rough conditions, you want the Extreme III cards.

I would prefer the Extreme III cards because they are more durable. That said, I own the Ultra II and Extreme III cards and I have not had a problem with either.

I would not purchase a "plan jane" card unless I was really in need of money. San Disk has a life time warranty on their products, which might be worth the additional cost. If you can try the "plain jane" cards to verify that they work and you are in need of cash, then go for it, but only from a reputable dealer. Some people have purchased total junk that did not work well...

For the money, you can't beat this here.

http://meritline.stores.yahoo.net/ritek-4gb-80x-compactflash-memory-card.html

I bought one and have been very happy with it in my 30D.

Thanks guys - I didn't know about the "reliability" factor with Ultras and Extremes. Money isn't a problem. I have just been using a stack of "plain jane" San Disk cards for 4 years as when I first got a digital camera (and now have 4) and those cards have been problem free, I don't even think Ultras and Extremes were available when I acquired most of my cards. Since I need to get a couple of more gb of memory, I just wondered for my purposes if getting an Ultra or Extreme card would be better or make any difference overall.

Now you know the reason for my quesiton. Any others out there who care to comment ?
--
Ranger a.k.a chammett
http://www.pbase.com/chammett

'elegance is simplicity'

.... and not meaning to be really stupid, but exactlyl what is the difference between the Extreme and the Ultra cards ?
--
Ranger a.k.a chammett
http://www.pbase.com/chammett

'elegance is simplicity'

I am no expert but my understanding is that when I am in Alaska taking pictures of the glaciers and the temperature is really cold; then the Extreme would be preferred over the Ultra. That said I own mostly Ultra II cards and have never had a problem in over 12,000 shots.
--
Norm

Exactly.... Extreme conditions. If you already have cards and they work for you, do not replace them unless you are unhappy with them. Unless you do temperature variations, etc, the primary motivation is speed.

Would I prefer the Extreme III? Yes. Am I likely to ever notice the difference? No. I own both.

Thanks.... The most extreme temperatures I encounter are our Texas summers ! :-/ I'm very pleased with the "plain jane" San Disk cards I have used for the past 4 years, and my reason for asking these dumb quesitons is that I need to get some more memory, as two of my four cameras are 8 mp, one is 6, and my faithful old G3 is 4. I'll be traveling with the two 8 mp cameras, and my usuall total of 3 gb of memory isn't going to be enough for this trip. I don't fool with taking a laptop (don't own one) or a digital download device, as for ME, taking multiple memory cards is less weight, bulk and trouble. I travel light !

carolyn
--
Ranger a.k.a chammett
http://www.pbase.com/chammett

'elegance is simplicity'

carolyn, the others have pretty well explained it, but i'll just add my 2 cents...if you can, i'd get the ultras for reliability and speed. reliability in that they just keep on keeping on, so to speak, and speed because time does add up during downloads especially. i doubt you'll notice any difference while shooting. the extremes operate in higher and lower temperature parameters, but once again, this wouldn't mean much to you unless you were shooting eskimos in alaska ijn the winter with Zidar (!!) or in the hot humid jungles somewhere ))) i think even in egypt shooting pyramids at mid-day in the summer you'd be fine with ultras )) i think the ultras are worth the money (and they aren't that expensive anymore) just for peace of mind. so far sandisk has a good record of compatibility with various cameras and readers.

and i believe in buying for the future. you'll have these cards for a few years, no doubt, and cards and cameras will get faster, so buy the best and the biggest now, 'cause tomorrow they will be slow and small LOL!
--
codfish

I have been using the Ultra cards for a year & a half.

20,000 photos later....I live in Phoenix....They worked great on the Alaska cruise and super in 110 degree heat of the desert!

As most everyone has stated, speed is the major difference between the plain janes and the others.

I have both plain janes and Ultras. While I have not noticed much difference while shooting, I have noticed difference in uploading the images to my computer as well as previewing the images on my camera.

The preview may be a psychological thing, but since the read speeds are faster on the Ultras it makes sense that the camera should be able to preview the image faster. The blurry image that first comes into view just seems to go sharp much faster with the Ultras.

Going to Nevada for the Grand Canyon and Valley of Fire in a few weeks. That's where the Extreme would come in handy for the "warm" conditions.

Can't wait. I heard the Valley of Fire is an awesome sight!

--

I have discovered photography. Now I can kill myself. I have nothing else to learn. - Pablo Picasso

c.hammett said:

Can someone explain to me in simple terms the difference between
the Extreme, Ultra and ordinary CF cards ? I know Ultra and
Extreme are faster write cards, but if you don't shoot RAW, sports
,bursts, or kids at plaly, or need fast download, is there any
compelling reason to use the Extreme or Ultra cards ? Also, is
the main difference between the "II" and "III" types mainly speed ?

Thanks...carolyn
--
Ranger a.k.a chammett
http://www.pbase.com/chammett

'elegance is simplicity'

Click to expand...

--I"ve been using plain janes for 4 years because I had no problems with them, and originally there was some controversy about the fast cards creating problems. So I've avoided them as I added cards.. Now with all the input from you guys, I am comfortable with getting a couple to add to my stash. Thanks a bunch for all this info and putting up with my quesitons !

carolyn
Ranger a.k.a chammett
http://www.pbase.com/chammett

'elegance is simplicity'

codfish said:

carolyn, the others have pretty well explained it, but i'll just
add my 2 cents...if you can, i'd get the ultras for reliability and
speed. reliability in that they just keep on keeping on, so to
speak, and speed because time does add up during downloads
especially. i doubt you'll notice any difference while shooting.
the extremes operate in higher and lower temperature parameters,
but once again, this wouldn't mean much to you unless you were
shooting eskimos in alaska ijn the winter with Zidar (!!) or in the
hot humid jungles somewhere ))) i think even in egypt shooting
pyramids at mid-day in the summer you'd be fine with ultras )) >
i think the ultras are worth the money (and they aren't that
expensive anymore) just for peace of mind. so far sandisk has a
good record of compatibility with various cameras and readers.

Click to expand...

codfish said:

and i believe in buying for the future. you'll have these cards
for a few years, no doubt, and cards and cameras will get faster,
so buy the best and the biggest now, 'cause tomorrow they will be
slow and small LOL!
--
codfish

Click to expand...

--No Eskimos in the winter, but Egypt is wonderful in winter and we will be back there in January. Hadn't thought of the cards and cameras getting faster, so will take your advice . I remember my little G3 came with a 32 mb card. Not good for much of anythng then and certainly not now !
Great advice !

carolyn
Ranger a.k.a chammett
http://www.pbase.com/chammett

'elegance is simplicity'

BillyBuff said:

Going to Nevada for the Grand Canyon and Valley of Fire in a few
weeks. That's where the Extreme would come in handy for the "warm"
conditions.

Can't wait. I heard the Valley of Fire is an awesome sight!

--
I have discovered photography. Now I can kill myself. I have
nothing else to learn. - Pablo Picasso

Click to expand...

Have fun ! Any slot canyons at the Valley of Fire ?

carolyn

Ranger a.k.a chammett
http://www.pbase.com/chammett

'elegance is simplicity'

Two thoughts...

1. SPEED... Just last week, I switched from an old 1GB Unity Digital card to a 2GB Ultra II. The speed was very obvious. I shoot RAW, so images transfer much faster now. I can preview them in half of the time. When in preview mode, images fly by when I rotate the wheel. That never happened with my old card. Images might transfer to my PC faster, but I don't notice that benefit as much as the on-camera benefits that I just mentioned.

2. GREAT WEB PAGE... Here's an excellent link (that I probably found through dpreview) for assessing the relative speed of various memory cards in your camera. Select your camera (I use the 20D) and a long list of cards will be displayed in descending speed.

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007-7303

Enjoy!

Dave