A7III SD Card Question

[jchoi]

Hi everyone,

I’ll hopefully have an A7III soon and I had a question about memory cards. I have Sandisk Extreme Pro SD cards (95 MB/s) and based on what I read in this article, https://alikgriffin.com/best-memory-cards-sony-a7iii/, they should be adequate since I don’t shot video yet. But I was wondering if people see a performance difference between UHS I and UHS II cards for things like reviewing images? There was a slight lag on the D750 when initially reviewing pictures and it drove me nuts.

Thanks!

 

[bayindirh]

Hi everyone,

I’ll hopefully have an A7III soon and I had a question about memory cards. I have Sandisk Extreme Pro SD cards (95 MB/s) and based on what I read in this article, https://alikgriffin.com/best-memory-cards-sony-a7iii/, they should be adequate since I don’t shot video yet. But I was wondering if people see a performance difference between UHS I and UHS II cards for things like reviewing images? There was a slight lag on the D750 when initially reviewing pictures and it drove me nuts.

Thanks!

I'm using two of these cards in my A7III. It's perfectly capable of handling all video modes and shooting at full burst for a very formidable time.

UHS-II cards will be faster at clearing buffer, however you won't see any noticeable different in reviewing images. It's almost instantaneous to switch playback mode and there's no lag in browsing images.

Sony uses an "image database" on card, and it allows them to do neat tricks like calendar-based image reviews or review by image type without searching the card throughout.

Only downside of it, deleting images from card using a PC is not suggested. I always delete images from the camera, so it didn't create any problems. Camera has a "delete everything with this date" option, so you can clear the card pretty quickly.

Last but not the least, A7III warns you if any of the cards that you'll record video does not have the required write speeds when you select the video format. That's a very nice thing if you ask me.

Hope that helps.

--
https://www.flickr.com/zerocoder/

 

[jchoi]

Thanks bayindirh!

I was hoping to not have to buy new cards and if there is no performance difference aside from clearing the buffer (and I rarely shoot in large bursts), then it sounds like I'll be fine shooting with my UHS-I cards.

 

[LenRivers]

I use the Sandisk UHS-II and I in slots one and two. there is no requirement to use UHS-II.

I also shoot RAW or RAW and JPEG and i have my video if i ever do that to slot 1.

I use to shoot the D750 and D850. If I recall the D750 was not UHS-II complainant if i am wrong oh well, I think I am correct. The D850 uses XQD which is just wonderful and expensive to use at least in slot 1

So for burst use, RAW, Video use why not get all you can out of the tech, but UHS-1 cards are cheap enough you can do your own testing then decide if you need UHS-ii

The other brand I use are Sony branded SD cards.

IMO i have no interest in Prograde cards which is the successor I guess to Lexar.

I still recommend back up cards for each slot I usually do a 64 gb and 32 gb UHS-II and UHS-i

Keep in mind the investment is one time coming from the film cameras it really is not expensive at all when you use to have to pay between $7 and $12 for a roll of film and an average of $10 each to develop. Not even getting into the whole doing it yourself thing just average pay a lab to do it.

**

If you really want to test your self when you go out to shoot think in blocks of 24 or even 36 shots to get what you need since the typical local outing was maybe 4 rolls of film (36) exposure. $30 for the film and $40 to process so there is $70 for single prints.

Maybe a stretch but I think those with a film background have a big advantage in this digital age.

 

[bayindirh]

I use the Sandisk UHS-II and I in slots one and two. there is no requirement to use UHS-II.

I also shoot RAW or RAW and JPEG and i have my video if i ever do that to slot 1.

I use to shoot the D750 and D850. If I recall the D750 was not UHS-II complainant if i am wrong oh well, I think I am correct. The D850 uses XQD which is just wonderful and expensive to use at least in slot 1

So for burst use, RAW, Video use why not get all you can out of the tech, but UHS-1 cards are cheap enough you can do your own testing then decide if you need UHS-ii

Since A7III is only 24MP, you can use an UHS-I card like Sandisk Extreme Pro and do RAW+JPEG bursts pretty well. Also, these cards handle all the 4K formats pretty nicely. BTW, Sandisk's Extreme Pro is possibly has the best real world performance amongst UHS-I cards.

The other brand I use are Sony branded SD cards.

IMO i have no interest in Prograde cards which is the successor I guess to Lexar.

I still recommend back up cards for each slot I usually do a 64 gb and 32 gb UHS-II and UHS-i

Keep in mind the investment is one time coming from the film cameras it really is not expensive at all when you use to have to pay between $7 and $12 for a roll of film and an average of $10 each to develop. Not even getting into the whole doing it yourself thing just average pay a lab to do it.

I don't know OP's situation, but Sandisk's 64GB UHS-II Extreme Pro is retailing for five times the price of the 64GB UHS-I Extreme Pro here. Being the slower one is capable of handling long bursts for 99% of the time (at least for me) and 4K video, I can spend that kind of money for a nice filter, or for a partial payment for a nice lens

Also, I can regularly rotate my cards since they are the same, and can get the same performance regardless of the slot.

**

If you really want to test your self when you go out to shoot think in blocks of 24 or even 36 shots to get what you need since the typical local outing was maybe 4 rolls of film (36) exposure. $30 for the film and $40 to process so there is $70 for single prints.

Maybe a stretch but I think those with a film background have a big advantage in this digital age.

 

[sawakura]

Sandisk released a newer version of extreme pro. The new one is Sandisk Extreme Pro 170MB/s (Write 90MB/s). I wonder anyone tried it yet

 

[jchoi]

I use the Sandisk UHS-II and I in slots one and two. there is no requirement to use UHS-II.

I also shoot RAW or RAW and JPEG and i have my video if i ever do that to slot 1.

I use to shoot the D750 and D850. If I recall the D750 was not UHS-II complainant if i am wrong oh well, I think I am correct. The D850 uses XQD which is just wonderful and expensive to use at least in slot 1

So for burst use, RAW, Video use why not get all you can out of the tech, but UHS-1 cards are cheap enough you can do your own testing then decide if you need UHS-ii

The other brand I use are Sony branded SD cards.

IMO i have no interest in Prograde cards which is the successor I guess to Lexar.

I still recommend back up cards for each slot I usually do a 64 gb and 32 gb UHS-II and UHS-i

Keep in mind the investment is one time coming from the film cameras it really is not expensive at all when you use to have to pay between $7 and $12 for a roll of film and an average of $10 each to develop. Not even getting into the whole doing it yourself thing just average pay a lab to do it.

**

If you really want to test your self when you go out to shoot think in blocks of 24 or even 36 shots to get what you need since the typical local outing was maybe 4 rolls of film (36) exposure. $30 for the film and $40 to process so there is $70 for single prints.

Maybe a stretch but I think those with a film background have a big advantage in this digital age.

You're correct, the D750 was only UHS-I compliant, so I used the fastest card at the time (an Extreme Pro 95 MB/s card), but there was a noticeable lag when initially reviewing images. Once the first image came up, it behaved normally. I'm expecting a lag in being "ready to shoot" in moving from an OVF to an EVF, and I'd spend more for a UHS-II card if it helped in that regard. If it doesn't, I don't believe I've ever filled the buffer on any of my cameras.

Thanks!

 

[jchoi]

I use the Sandisk UHS-II and I in slots one and two. there is no requirement to use UHS-II.

I also shoot RAW or RAW and JPEG and i have my video if i ever do that to slot 1.

I use to shoot the D750 and D850. If I recall the D750 was not UHS-II complainant if i am wrong oh well, I think I am correct. The D850 uses XQD which is just wonderful and expensive to use at least in slot 1

So for burst use, RAW, Video use why not get all you can out of the tech, but UHS-1 cards are cheap enough you can do your own testing then decide if you need UHS-ii

Since A7III is only 24MP, you can use an UHS-I card like Sandisk Extreme Pro and do RAW+JPEG bursts pretty well. Also, these cards handle all the 4K formats pretty nicely. BTW, Sandisk's Extreme Pro is possibly has the best real world performance amongst UHS-I cards.

The other brand I use are Sony branded SD cards.

IMO i have no interest in Prograde cards which is the successor I guess to Lexar.

I still recommend back up cards for each slot I usually do a 64 gb and 32 gb UHS-II and UHS-i

Keep in mind the investment is one time coming from the film cameras it really is not expensive at all when you use to have to pay between $7 and $12 for a roll of film and an average of $10 each to develop. Not even getting into the whole doing it yourself thing just average pay a lab to do it.

I don't know OP's situation, but Sandisk's 64GB UHS-II Extreme Pro is retailing for five times the price of the 64GB UHS-I Extreme Pro here. Being the slower one is capable of handling long bursts for 99% of the time (at least for me) and 4K video, I can spend that kind of money for a nice filter, or for a partial payment for a nice lens

Also, I can regularly rotate my cards since they are the same, and can get the same performance regardless of the slot.

**

If you really want to test your self when you go out to shoot think in blocks of 24 or even 36 shots to get what you need since the typical local outing was maybe 4 rolls of film (36) exposure. $30 for the film and $40 to process so there is $70 for single prints.

Maybe a stretch but I think those with a film background have a big advantage in this digital age.

I will probably dabble in 4K video at some point but with the 5X cost difference between UHS-I and UHS-II you pointed out, I would only pay that speed premium if it made the camera function/perform quicker. Like being ready to shoot quicker, cycling through images quicker, initially reviewing images quicker, etc.

Thanks!

 

[bayindirh]

I use the Sandisk UHS-II and I in slots one and two. there is no requirement to use UHS-II.

I also shoot RAW or RAW and JPEG and i have my video if i ever do that to slot 1.

I use to shoot the D750 and D850. If I recall the D750 was not UHS-II complainant if i am wrong oh well, I think I am correct. The D850 uses XQD which is just wonderful and expensive to use at least in slot 1

So for burst use, RAW, Video use why not get all you can out of the tech, but UHS-1 cards are cheap enough you can do your own testing then decide if you need UHS-ii

Since A7III is only 24MP, you can use an UHS-I card like Sandisk Extreme Pro and do RAW+JPEG bursts pretty well. Also, these cards handle all the 4K formats pretty nicely. BTW, Sandisk's Extreme Pro is possibly has the best real world performance amongst UHS-I cards.

The other brand I use are Sony branded SD cards.

IMO i have no interest in Prograde cards which is the successor I guess to Lexar.

I still recommend back up cards for each slot I usually do a 64 gb and 32 gb UHS-II and UHS-i

Keep in mind the investment is one time coming from the film cameras it really is not expensive at all when you use to have to pay between $7 and $12 for a roll of film and an average of $10 each to develop. Not even getting into the whole doing it yourself thing just average pay a lab to do it.

I don't know OP's situation, but Sandisk's 64GB UHS-II Extreme Pro is retailing for five times the price of the 64GB UHS-I Extreme Pro here. Being the slower one is capable of handling long bursts for 99% of the time (at least for me) and 4K video, I can spend that kind of money for a nice filter, or for a partial payment for a nice lens

Also, I can regularly rotate my cards since they are the same, and can get the same performance regardless of the slot.

**

If you really want to test your self when you go out to shoot think in blocks of 24 or even 36 shots to get what you need since the typical local outing was maybe 4 rolls of film (36) exposure. $30 for the film and $40 to process so there is $70 for single prints.

Maybe a stretch but I think those with a film background have a big advantage in this digital age.

I will probably dabble in 4K video at some point but with the 5X cost difference between UHS-I and UHS-II you pointed out, I would only pay that speed premium if it made the camera function/perform quicker. Like being ready to shoot quicker, cycling through images quicker, initially reviewing images quicker, etc.

Thanks!

You're most definitely welcome. Enjoy your new camera!