Reading mode: Light Dark

Card failures?

Card failures?

  • Total voters
    0
Go to last post
AlbertTheLazy said:
PhilDunn said:
AlbertTheLazy said:
PhilDunn said:
AlbertTheLazy said:
PhilDunn said:
Michael Fryd said:
For some people the cost is quite high for that extra card slot.
Click to expand...
As opposed to the cost of trying to recover lost files on that single card and the cost to your reputation and your business for losing a clients once in a lifetime images?
Click to expand...
Why assume that everybody here is (a) a currently working professional
Click to expand...
I haven’t.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
See the sentence in bold above.
Click to expand...
Read all my comments.
AlbertTheLazy said:
AlbertTheLazy said:
AlbertTheLazy said:
AlbertTheLazy said:
All photographers take photos they wish to preserve. Professionals simply have more reason to do so.
Click to expand...
Non-professionals don't have clients to lose.
Click to expand...
They don’t need any to want to preserve their images.
AlbertTheLazy said:
AlbertTheLazy said:
AlbertTheLazy said:
and (b) spends much or all their working time shooting irreplacable images.
Click to expand...
You've never taken any photos you wish to preserve?
Click to expand...
I didn't say that.
Click to expand...
It's a valid question for someone taking a position against the utility of two card cameras.
Click to expand...
I have not taken 'a position against the utility of two card cameras'.
Click to expand...
Based on your responses to me and what I have actually said throughout my posts, that is exactly how it is coming across.
AlbertTheLazy said:
I have agreed with the opinion that it is a matter of personal judgment whether it is worth the cost, effort or whatever to use a two card camera as a way to reduce the risk of losing images. Or indeed, to use any other particular strategy.
Click to expand...
No doubt this topic was brought up by you based on the omission of two slots in the new Nikon cameras. For anyone buying the top level cameras there is little to no cost, which makes their omission in those new cameras all the more perplexing, and which no doubt fueled your interest in the matter. In that case it isn’t a matter of cost and would be an objectively foolish thing to dismiss, all other things generally being equal. In the end the utility of two cards can never be logically questioned.
AlbertTheLazy said:
As you believe that it is valid to restate people's posts in any way that suits your argument I fail to see any value in continuing this discussion.
Click to expand...
Nonsense; that is what you and someone else are doing. I haven’t been dishonest in how I have addressed your comments or anyone else’s. Never have been and never will be. For example, unlike some people I don’t quote things out of context, nor do I delete a person's posts in the quoted thread so I can then respond without others being able to compare and validate my response.
 
Michael Fryd said:
PhilDunn said:
Michael Fryd said:
...
Click to expand...
I've never met or heard of any photographer that has never taken any photos that they didn’t want to preserve, so it isn’t about me.
Click to expand...
Then you have't met any who work by the hour.

If the card fails and you have to re-shoot, they get to bill more hours.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter if you can find exceptions, and in that case an unethical one; the point is most photographers do in fact care about preserving at least some of their images.
 
Mike CH said:
Michael Fryd said:
PhilDunn said:
Mike CH said:
...
Click to expand...
I've never met or heard of any photographer that has never taken any photos that they didn’t want to preserve, so it isn’t about me.
Click to expand...
Then you have't met any who work by the hour.

If the card fails and you have to re-shoot, they get to bill more hours.
Click to expand...
He also hasn’t been listening, or rather reading, all that closely to what people have been saying in this thread. And that’s before we get to the kind of convoluted, triple-negative kind of sentences as above...

Regards, Mike
Click to expand...
When I address you or anyone else I am addressing individuals and *what they say.* You do not equal other people so stop trying to recruit numbers to support your previously illogical, misleading and even dishonest comments, which in the latter case means deleting my original comment in the quoted thread in order to prevent others from more easily validating your response to it, and quoting me and responding out of context.
 
PhilDunn said:
Michael Fryd said:
PhilDunn said:
Member said:
...
Click to expand...
I've never met or heard of any photographer that has never taken any photos that they didn’t want to preserve, so it isn’t about me.
Click to expand...
Then you have't met any who work by the hour.

If the card fails and you have to re-shoot, they get to bill more hours.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter if you can find exceptions, and in that case an unethical one; the point is most photographers do in fact care about preserving at least some of their images.
Click to expand...
It's not necessarily unethical.

For instance, if a single card slot allows you to save $1,500 per camera (i.e. Canon 6D2 instead of 5D4), then using a single card slot can result in significant savings (particularly if you have a primary and backup camera).

The general consensus seems to be that loss of images due to card failure is a rare event.

From a business perspective, it might make sense to save thousands upfront by buying single card bodies, and taking the chance that you may have to pay an employee for a few extra hours.

====

For such an employee, if you love your jon, what's wrong with being happy, if you get another chance to do a job? It's like a car owner being happy that someone stole and totaled his car. The car owner did nothing wrong, and his insurance will buy him a new car.

As long as the photographer did nothing to cause the loss of the images, I don't an ethics issue.
 
dougjgreen1 said:
dougjgreen1 said:
You seem to contradict yourself. You had a problem with a card that wasn't a problem with the card. (?)

Had the camera had a second slot, would that have resolved the problem you had?
Click to expand...
He would have known he had the images on another card as well, so he would not have aged in the time it took to diagnose the problem.
Click to expand...
Actually, he would have had the same problem with the second card (same card reader) and would therefor have aged TWICE as much.
 
Michael Fryd said:
PhilDunn said:
Michael Fryd said:
PhilDunn said:
Michael Fryd said:
...
Click to expand...
I've never met or heard of any photographer that has never taken any photos that they didn’t want to preserve, so it isn’t about me.
Click to expand...
Then you have't met any who work by the hour.

If the card fails and you have to re-shoot, they get to bill more hours.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter if you can find exceptions, and in that case an unethical one; the point is most photographers do in fact care about preserving at least some of their images.
Click to expand...
It's not necessarily unethical.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is unethical to charge a client again for your irresponsibility.
Michael Fryd said:
For instance, if a single card slot allows you to save $1,500 per camera (i.e. Canon 6D2 instead of 5D4), then using a single card slot can result in significant savings (particularly if you have a primary and backup camera).
Click to expand...
To you, in the short term, but obviously not the affected clients.

And like I previously said to you, those inclined to buy top level cameras will already be in the category where most cameras, if not all, have dual slots, unlike the bizarre omission in the new Nikons.
Michael Fryd said:
The general consensus seems to be that loss of images due to card failure is a rare event.
Click to expand...
Shoot enough and it is not so rare. There is a likelihood you will experience such an event, just like a heavy and veteran computer user will eventually run into drive failures.
Michael Fryd said:
From a business perspective, it might make sense to save thousands upfront by buying single card bodies, and taking the chance that you may have to pay an employee for a few extra hours.
Click to expand...
As I again said to you before, not every photographer has assistants. I suspect most wedding photographers, for example, are working on their own. I have also given you one example of a camera that has dual card slots that is affordable. One could also buy used or refurbished to offset any extra cost. That's putting aside the fact that many pros are already buying from a category of camera where dual slots are the norm.
 
PhilDunn said:
Michael Fryd said:
PhilDunn said:
Michael Fryd said:
PhilDunn said:
Member said:
...
Click to expand...
I've never met or heard of any photographer that has never taken any photos that they didn’t want to preserve, so it isn’t about me.
Click to expand...
Then you have't met any who work by the hour.

If the card fails and you have to re-shoot, they get to bill more hours.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter if you can find exceptions, and in that case an unethical one; the point is most photographers do in fact care about preserving at least some of their images.
Click to expand...
It's not necessarily unethical.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is unethical to charge a client again for your irresponsibility.
Click to expand...
Who said anything about charging clients? Not all photographers are one man businesses. If your boss provides a one card camera, and your boss pays you to reshoot, your boss may be eating the cost of the reshoot.

The occasional reshoot may cost the boss much less than 2 card cameras.
Member said:
Member said:
For instance, if a single card slot allows you to save $1,500 per camera (i.e. Canon 6D2 instead of 5D4), then using a single card slot can result in significant savings (particularly if you have a primary and backup camera).
Click to expand...
To you, in the short term, but obviously not the affected clients.

And like I previously said to you, those inclined to buy top level cameras will already be in the category where most cameras, if not all, have dual slots, unlike the bizarre omission in the new Nikons.
Click to expand...
From a business perspective, it doesn't make sense to buy a camera that's more expensive than needed.

If a $1,000 camera will do the job, then a $4,000 camera will also get the job done. The difference is the guy with the $4,000 camera will make $3,000 less profit that year. That's not a god business plan.

Member said:
Member said:
The general consensus seems to be that loss of images due to card failure is a rare event.
Click to expand...
Shoot enough and it is not so rare. There is a likelihood you will experience such an event, just like a heavy and veteran computer user will eventually run into drive failures.
Click to expand...
It still boils down to the cost of a failure vs. the cost of reducing the chance of that failure. Finding the right balance is a business decision.

Member said:
Member said:
From a business perspective, it might make sense to save thousands upfront by buying single card bodies, and taking the chance that you may have to pay an employee for a few extra hours.
Click to expand...
As I again said to you before, not every photographer has assistants. I suspect most wedding photographers, for example, are working on their own. I have also given you one example of a camera that has dual card slots that is affordable. One could also buy used or refurbished to offset any extra cost. That's putting aside the fact that many pros are already buying from a category of camera where dual slots are the norm.
Click to expand...
Sometimes, a photographer may want to consider factors other than the number of card slots.

While you can save money of a 2 slot camera, you can also save money on a used 1 slot camera.

You are absolutely correct in that there are situations where a dual card camera is very beneficial to a photographer. However, there are also situations where it isn't worth using dual cards.
 
ISO 1 Million said:
I've been using sd and micro sd cards since 2005 or so. In that time, I've had at least 6 or 7 cards fail on me. There are always the telltale signs of severe slowing down, images not playing back, and extremely slow transfer speeds.

My most recent failure had me close to throwing my A7RII out the window. I had just finished a photoshoot with my dance instructor which took about an hour and a half. She has a busy schedule so it's not easy to set up another shoot. I got home, plugged in my sd card into the reader and it took nearly half an hour for the image previews to appear. When I tried to drag and drop them to my desktop, the status bar froze and gave me an ETA of several DAYS. I only had about 100 raw files. I knew it wasn't a problem with the reader because I tried several other sd cards and they all worked fine.

I eventually got the images after waiting several hours. I sent the card back to Sandisk and they replaced it for free. Now my A7RII sits on the shelf unused as I can never trust it ever again.
Click to expand...
Is that true? You have a valuable camera just sitting there that you will never use it again? Obviously you can't sell it to some other unsuspecting person as that would be unethical.

Send it to me. Seriously. PM me your bank details and I will send you the cost of shipping plus $200 just because. I promise not to seek any redress if it corrupts a card on me. I am fully informed about its problems.
 
I said never because, well, because never. I have had two slot cameras, which was cool, but am not bothered that none of my current cameras have two slots.

But, I am a little bemused by the posts from people who have said it would have cost Nikon "nothing" or "$20" to put in a second slot. I am no electrical engineer, but surely it is not that simple.

A big part of the point with mirrorless cameras is the more compact body, which means less space for components. Including a second slot would have meant design changes, compromises, to the body and other internal components and operating systems. Obviously it is possible and Nikon will almost certainly do it in future models, but it is not a cost neutral or $20 inclusion.
 
contadorfan said:
Dual card slots in the pre-digital age
Dual card slots in the pre-digital age

--
"Never let good clouds go to waste." -- Margaret Bourke-White
Click to expand...
I thought they carried multiple cameras because film rolls were limited to 24-36 shots? It was time consuming to change film during combat.
 
I don't understand this obsession with having dual memory card slots.

Back in the day, we never had cameras that took two films.
Are memory cards that unreliable?
I've had far more failures with film (usually slide processing) than I have ever had memory card failures (precisely zero in 16 years.)
At least you have an immediate check on card function, with film you had to wait for it to be processed.
 
Michael Fryd said:
PhilDunn said:
Michael Fryd said:
PhilDunn said:
Michael Fryd said:
PhilDunn said:
Michael Fryd said:
...
Click to expand...
I've never met or heard of any photographer that has never taken any photos that they didn’t want to preserve, so it isn’t about me.
Click to expand...
Then you have't met any who work by the hour.

If the card fails and you have to re-shoot, they get to bill more hours.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter if you can find exceptions, and in that case an unethical one; the point is most photographers do in fact care about preserving at least some of their images.
Click to expand...
It's not necessarily unethical.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is unethical to charge a client again for your irresponsibility.
Click to expand...
Who said anything about charging clients?
Click to expand...
Did you forget what was being discussed? After all, you were part of the relevant discussion.
Michael Fryd said:
Not all photographers are one man businesses.
Click to expand...
Obviously. Never said or suggested otherwise.
Michael Fryd said:
If your boss provides a one card camera, and your boss pays you to reshoot, your boss may be eating the cost of the reshoot.

The occasional reshoot may cost the boss much less than 2 card cameras.
Click to expand...
Again, go back and read what was being discussed.
Michael Fryd said:
Michael Fryd said:
Michael Fryd said:
For instance, if a single card slot allows you to save $1,500 per camera (i.e. Canon 6D2 instead of 5D4), then using a single card slot can result in significant savings (particularly if you have a primary and backup camera).
Click to expand...
To you, in the short term, but obviously not the affected clients.

And like I previously said to you, those inclined to buy top level cameras will already be in the category where most cameras, if not all, have dual slots, unlike the bizarre omission in the new Nikons.
Click to expand...
From a business perspective, it doesn't make sense to buy a camera that's more expensive than needed.
Click to expand...
Business expenses don’t start and end with the purchase of things.
Michael Fryd said:
If a $1,000 camera will do the job, then a $4,000 camera will also get the job done. The difference is the guy with the $4,000 camera will make $3,000 less profit that year. That's not a god business plan.
Click to expand...
Funny, the more you try and defend your comments the greater the difference your prices get between a one card camera and a two. 😁
Michael Fryd said:
Michael Fryd said:
Michael Fryd said:
The general consensus seems to be that loss of images due to card failure is a rare event.
Click to expand...
Shoot enough and it is not so rare. There is a likelihood you will experience such an event, just like a heavy and veteran computer user will eventually run into drive failures.
Click to expand...
It still boils down to the cost of a failure vs. the cost of reducing the chance of that failure. Finding the right balance is a business decision.
Click to expand...
There is no logical business reason preventing a professional photographer from using a two card camera. None. Zip. Zero.
Michael Fryd said:
Michael Fryd said:
Michael Fryd said:
From a business perspective, it might make sense to save thousands upfront by buying single card bodies, and taking the chance that you may have to pay an employee for a few extra hours.
Click to expand...
As I again said to you before, not every photographer has assistants. I suspect most wedding photographers, for example, are working on their own. I have also given you one example of a camera that has dual card slots that is affordable. One could also buy used or refurbished to offset any extra cost. That's putting aside the fact that many pros are already buying from a category of camera where dual slots are the norm.
Click to expand...
Sometimes, a photographer may want to consider factors other than the number of card slots.
Click to expand...
😖😖😖 The discussion is about having a real time backup to your photos!
Michael Fryd said:
While you can save money of a 2 slot camera, you can also save money on a used 1 slot camera.
Click to expand...
You're moving the goal posts again. If a refurbished 2 card camera is now within budget then that would be the logical purchase, not your now cheaper used 1 card camera.
Michael Fryd said:
You are absolutely correct in that there are situations where a dual card camera is very beneficial to a photographer. However, there are also situations where it isn't worth using dual cards.
Click to expand...
A two card camera is beneficial to ALL photographers who even occasionally wish to preserve their photos, and the cost for a professional is not relevant. It is only in your world where your two card cameras keep getting more expensive with every post you make. 😆
 
MisterBG said:
I don't understand this obsession with having dual memory card slots.
Click to expand...
I don't know that "obsession" is the right word. "Some" photographers have come to expect dual slots after a certain point
BG454 said:
Back in the day, we never had cameras that took two films.
Click to expand...
And at some point you didn't have more than 2fps, advanced metering, more than 36 shots before film change, advanced wireless TTL, live view, video capabilities, etc. You created what you could with the products available. Today people expect a product created with the tools available. If you haven't noticed event(particularly wedding) photography is delivering a VASTLY superior product compared to ten or twenty years ago. Is what it is
BG454 said:
Are memory cards that unreliable?
Click to expand...
No. Not at all. They do fail though. You were a seatbelt despite not expecting to crash
BG454 said:
I've had far more failures with film (usually slide processing) than I have ever had memory card failures (precisely zero in 16 years.)
Click to expand...
Then your due. Maybe your lucky. Maybe it will never happen to you. It CAN happen. It is up to the user on whether to obsess .
BG454 said:
At least you have an immediate check on card function,
Click to expand...
Which is awesome except then are you advocating chimping every shot? That may not fit into everyone's workflow. It also won't do anything about the card failing after the shots are taken.
BG454 said:
with film you had to wait for it to be processed.
Click to expand...
Just try and put yourself in someone else's shoes. Anything can and will break. Professionals take steps to protect against the unlikely .It is usually cheaper than the fallout from losing important clents data. Spread this out to other sectors. Redundant drives, UPS devices, cloud backup, etc.

Now to the camera being discussed. Four of the five full frame manufacturers that spring to mind include dual slots at 2,000 now. Nikon did with the D750. So to exclude it from the new bodies is a bit odd. Especially when you consider one of those models is over $3,000.

I still think on paper it looks like some nice offerings from Nikon. The single slot will be an actual issue for some purchasers and those that just like to dismiss other offerings will use it as an argument
 
TacticDesigns said:
AlbertTheLazy said:
...

So my question is: Have you lost images due the card being unreadable when you tried to copy to your computer?
Click to expand...
I've lost at least one image due to SD card failure.

It was a casual get together for our cheer club.

Instead of bringing out my Nikon D750 or D7000 (both of which have dual card slots) I decided to travel light and brought my Nikon D5100 which only has a single card slot.

I had tossed in a 32GB micro SD card (via SD card adapter).

I was grabbing some beginning of the season pictures . . . when all the coaches lined themselves up. I went to take a picture with my D5100 . . . and . . . no click! The SD Card failed.

So I lost that shot.

I happened to have my waterproof Fujifilm XP80 in my back pocket, so I managed to grab a shot that way.

And then I swapped the memory card out of my compact camera into my dSLR to get a few more shots.

But . . . going through the back of my mind was . . . did I lose everything on that failed card?

Luckily . . . when I stuck that card into my computer all the pictures up until the failure were accessible on the SD card.

So technically it was only the picture I was trying to take when the card failed that I "lost".

But I'm thinking . . . I got off lucky. If the card had some how degraded more . . . I could have lost some of the shots I had already taken.

If I had used my dual card camera, even if the failed SD card became unreadable . . . I'd still have the back-up card.

Also . . . there is a paid shot that I do that I work with another photographer.

I end up grabbing all the pictures and process them.

But of us have cameras with dual card slots.

At the end of the day, the other photographer gives me one of the memory cards, but he keeps the other card. But he doesn't erase his card until I tell him I was able to successfully download the images to my computer.

So we have a bit of redundancy that way.

But . . . the last time, I worked with another photographer that only had 1 memory card slot in their camera.

When I grab the memory card from them, the only existing copy of those shots from the day, I was very nervous.

It was very stressful knowing that there was only 1 copy of those images.

I was not comfortable until I got home and successfully transferred the pictures to my computer.

It made me realize how much having 2 copies of the images seemed to reduce my stress level! LOL.

But . . . when I am not shooting for other people or for paid work . . . I shoot one SD card all the time!

On vacation for family get togethers . . . 1 SD Card and . . . straight to JPG!!! LOL.

Take care & Happy Shooting!
:)
Click to expand...
I'm wondering, if photographers are that nervous or worried about card failure, then why don't they just buy new SD cards for every shoot? SD cards are cheap, and the chance of failure is much smaller with a brand new card.
 
Gizmo89 said:
TacticDesigns said:
AlbertTheLazy said:
...

So my question is: Have you lost images due the card being unreadable when you tried to copy to your computer?
Click to expand...
I've lost at least one image due to SD card failure.

It was a casual get together for our cheer club.

Instead of bringing out my Nikon D750 or D7000 (both of which have dual card slots) I decided to travel light and brought my Nikon D5100 which only has a single card slot.

I had tossed in a 32GB micro SD card (via SD card adapter).

I was grabbing some beginning of the season pictures . . . when all the coaches lined themselves up. I went to take a picture with my D5100 . . . and . . . no click! The SD Card failed.

So I lost that shot.

I happened to have my waterproof Fujifilm XP80 in my back pocket, so I managed to grab a shot that way.

And then I swapped the memory card out of my compact camera into my dSLR to get a few more shots.

But . . . going through the back of my mind was . . . did I lose everything on that failed card?

Luckily . . . when I stuck that card into my computer all the pictures up until the failure were accessible on the SD card.

So technically it was only the picture I was trying to take when the card failed that I "lost".

But I'm thinking . . . I got off lucky. If the card had some how degraded more . . . I could have lost some of the shots I had already taken.

If I had used my dual card camera, even if the failed SD card became unreadable . . . I'd still have the back-up card.

Also . . . there is a paid shot that I do that I work with another photographer.

I end up grabbing all the pictures and process them.

But of us have cameras with dual card slots.

At the end of the day, the other photographer gives me one of the memory cards, but he keeps the other card. But he doesn't erase his card until I tell him I was able to successfully download the images to my computer.

So we have a bit of redundancy that way.

But . . . the last time, I worked with another photographer that only had 1 memory card slot in their camera.

When I grab the memory card from them, the only existing copy of those shots from the day, I was very nervous.

It was very stressful knowing that there was only 1 copy of those images.

I was not comfortable until I got home and successfully transferred the pictures to my computer.

It made me realize how much having 2 copies of the images seemed to reduce my stress level! LOL.

But . . . when I am not shooting for other people or for paid work . . . I shoot one SD card all the time!

On vacation for family get togethers . . . 1 SD Card and . . . straight to JPG!!! LOL.

Take care & Happy Shooting!
:)
Click to expand...
I'm wondering, if photographers are that nervous or worried about card failure, then why don't they just buy new SD cards for every shoot? SD cards are cheap, and the chance of failure is much smaller with a brand new card.
Click to expand...
Storage failures, or the failure of most products, is not simply a matter of age. People buy new cars all the time. Many new cars still break down.
 
PhilDunn said:
Gizmo89 said:
TacticDesigns said:
AlbertTheLazy said:
...

So my question is: Have you lost images due the card being unreadable when you tried to copy to your computer?
Click to expand...
I've lost at least one image due to SD card failure.

It was a casual get together for our cheer club.

Instead of bringing out my Nikon D750 or D7000 (both of which have dual card slots) I decided to travel light and brought my Nikon D5100 which only has a single card slot.

I had tossed in a 32GB micro SD card (via SD card adapter).

I was grabbing some beginning of the season pictures . . . when all the coaches lined themselves up. I went to take a picture with my D5100 . . . and . . . no click! The SD Card failed.

So I lost that shot.

I happened to have my waterproof Fujifilm XP80 in my back pocket, so I managed to grab a shot that way.

And then I swapped the memory card out of my compact camera into my dSLR to get a few more shots.

But . . . going through the back of my mind was . . . did I lose everything on that failed card?

Luckily . . . when I stuck that card into my computer all the pictures up until the failure were accessible on the SD card.

So technically it was only the picture I was trying to take when the card failed that I "lost".

But I'm thinking . . . I got off lucky. If the card had some how degraded more . . . I could have lost some of the shots I had already taken.

If I had used my dual card camera, even if the failed SD card became unreadable . . . I'd still have the back-up card.

Also . . . there is a paid shot that I do that I work with another photographer.

I end up grabbing all the pictures and process them.

But of us have cameras with dual card slots.

At the end of the day, the other photographer gives me one of the memory cards, but he keeps the other card. But he doesn't erase his card until I tell him I was able to successfully download the images to my computer.

So we have a bit of redundancy that way.

But . . . the last time, I worked with another photographer that only had 1 memory card slot in their camera.

When I grab the memory card from them, the only existing copy of those shots from the day, I was very nervous.

It was very stressful knowing that there was only 1 copy of those images.

I was not comfortable until I got home and successfully transferred the pictures to my computer.

It made me realize how much having 2 copies of the images seemed to reduce my stress level! LOL.

But . . . when I am not shooting for other people or for paid work . . . I shoot one SD card all the time!

On vacation for family get togethers . . . 1 SD Card and . . . straight to JPG!!! LOL.

Take care & Happy Shooting!
:)
Click to expand...
I'm wondering, if photographers are that nervous or worried about card failure, then why don't they just buy new SD cards for every shoot? SD cards are cheap, and the chance of failure is much smaller with a brand new card.
Click to expand...
Storage failures, or the failure of most products, is not simply a matter of age. People buy new cars all the time. Many new cars still break down.
Click to expand...
+1

The 2 SD cards that I had fail on me were new.

One was bad right out of the package.

And the one that failed in-camera was one of my newest memory cards.

As for shooting . . . I like to go with cards I've had for a bit of time and I have a good feeling that they are good to go. :)

@Gizmo89 . . .

But the thing is . . . my preference to 2 cards is that I was lucky to be able to grab a camera with 2 cards and got used to it.

The 2nd card protects me against myself.

It gives a bit more back-up against me . . .

1. Accidentally erasing the card as I try to import it into the computer.

2. Accidentally misplacing a card.

3. Having a card stolen (while it is in the camera.) When a big shoot is done, if I need to take some time to pack up, I put one of the cards in an SD card case and put it into my pocket watch pocket while I leave the 2nd card in the much more protected card slot of the camera.

4. Accidentally dropping and stepping on a card. Or accidentally damaging the card in one way or another.

Take care & Happy Shooting!
:)
 
Last edited:
contadorfan said:
Evidently my attempt at gentle humor failed.
Click to expand...
+1

LOL.

Don't laugh . . . but I'm the dad that goes to my daughters' cheer competitions with two dSLR cameras and some back-up lenses, way more battery power than I need and back-up SD cards for each camera! LOL.

But . . . I am also trying to get shots of most of the teams for the yearbook as well.

So shooting for other people other than just myself and my family.

Besides not wanting to let my daughters down by not getting shots . . . I don't want to let down the efforts for the club yearbook.

But then . . . since both the dSLR cameras I take to cheer competitions have dual slots . . . I use two SD cards in both cameras while shooting.

Take care & Happy Shooting!
:)
 
New Day Rising said:
ISO 1 Million said:
I've been using sd and micro sd cards since 2005 or so. In that time, I've had at least 6 or 7 cards fail on me. There are always the telltale signs of severe slowing down, images not playing back, and extremely slow transfer speeds.

My most recent failure had me close to throwing my A7RII out the window. I had just finished a photoshoot with my dance instructor which took about an hour and a half. She has a busy schedule so it's not easy to set up another shoot. I got home, plugged in my sd card into the reader and it took nearly half an hour for the image previews to appear. When I tried to drag and drop them to my desktop, the status bar froze and gave me an ETA of several DAYS. I only had about 100 raw files. I knew it wasn't a problem with the reader because I tried several other sd cards and they all worked fine.

I eventually got the images after waiting several hours. I sent the card back to Sandisk and they replaced it for free. Now my A7RII sits on the shelf unused as I can never trust it ever again.
Click to expand...
Is that true? You have a valuable camera just sitting there that you will never use it again? Obviously you can't sell it to some other unsuspecting person as that would be unethical.

Send it to me. Seriously. PM me your bank details and I will send you the cost of shipping plus $200 just because. I promise not to seek any redress if it corrupts a card on me. I am fully informed about its problems.
Click to expand...
I highly doubt the story.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top