Snap Out of It!

[jl_smith]

XQD is far more robust and reliable than SD. You're literally more likely to have BOTH SD cards fail in a Sony vs. the XQD in the Nikon D850 or Z camera.

What is your source, please.

Sony and Nikon both stated that the XQD card format is more robust and reliable.

It's not a secret.

But here's what I was told by Nikon last year: The XQD format is 5 times more durable than SD.

I'll take a much faster single tougher XQD over 2 slower more failure prone SD cards any day. I do think the Z7 should have had a 2nd slot of some kind, but the Z6 is superior to a Sony a7III with two SD slots. XQD is awesome.

Rob

XQD may be faster and may be more durable 1 card vs 1 SD, but even given your supposed "5x more durable" statement from Nikon (whatever that means), statistically speaking dual SD are still less prone to catastrophically fail, as previously pointed out, by a factor of 20.

If dual SD had a 1/10,000 chance to fail, a single XQD would have a 1/500 chance to fail, even though it's "5x more durable" (again, whatever that means).

Someone on FM had an interesting take -- it could be Nikon did this on purpose while they hone the lineup, to keep the pros on the DSLRs (and dual slots) until they're ready to push pro-level mirrorless.

 

[Batdude]

ONE XQD slot is more reliable than 2 SD slots.

So what, I still prefer two SD cards, at least one slot as a more inexpensive OPTION.

XQD is far more robust and reliable than SD. You're literally more likely to have BOTH SD cards fail in a Sony vs. the XQD in the Nikon D850 or Z camera.

I still prefer and would go for SD cards. Never in my life had a failed SD cards so who are the ones trying to push us to go XQD? Okay, I appreciate "if" XQD cards are being built more robust, but for what application? Again, never in my life has one SD card gone bad on me so nobody is going to brain wash me into believing that I need a XQD. No way Jose!

One of the primary selling points of XQD (beyond speed) is that it's practically bulletproof compared to SD.

Still don't care for XQD and is way too expensive.

Okay, If from all the thousands and thousands of photos I have taken, fast action shooting, slow shooting, if only one of those cards had gone bad on me I would definitely back you up MrHollywood and say "YES SD cards are too dangerous and unreliable and cannot be trusted"

Maybe I'm the only lucky guy in these forums for never having a failed SD card so I just don't believe this nonsense that I have to spend three times more to get one XQD card. It ain't gonna happen!

Have a great weekend!

Rob

--
"We need a bigger boat."

 

[Dan_168]

ONE XQD slot is more reliable than 2 SD slots.

LOL, I can see A7R IV and A9 II will have one XQD instead of two SD if Sony is half as smart as you . LOL.

 

[tqlla]

I do suspect that my Df will be looking for a new home soon after my Z6 arrives. That reminds me, I need to order an XQD card.

BTW, I’ve left my spare at home more than once to gain the extra luggage space.

LOL. I sold my Df and it was a mistake, but I am looking at the Z6 as a perfect replacement. The idea that it will add some VR to my ART lenses and work with almost all of my Nikon glass...silent shutter and much more. I really am excited.

I'm going to wait for more reviews, but unless something of a practical nature pops up, I'll be ordering. I'm not sure I'll start with native lenses until the faster stuff comes along.

Did you order a native lens as well?

Rob

Since my D850 arrived (ours delivered within days of each other, I recall), the Df hasn’t seen too much action. That my Z6 might replace the Df wasn’t really in my mind when I placed my order, but the notion has grown over the last 24 hours.

If a glaring problem comes up, I can always cancel, I suppose. I just didn’t want to get into that Purgatory with the D850 again.

I didn’t order Z glass, only the adapter. I want to see how some of my MF glass works on it first (and my 28-70/2.8, though not so sure about the balance on top of the adapter). If I do decide to go new, I’m thinking probably the 35 to start.

I know its not my money, but I definitely think you should preorder with the 24-70mm F4. Its $600 additional to bundle it, or $1000 separately. Thats a pretty good discount.

It may mean you have to pass on that 256GB XQD card for now!

 

[Dan_168]

During the 3 years using my D810, I did have a SD card failure once, I would have lost all the photos taken before then if I hadn't backed them up on the second card. For me that's my habit, any time I have a break from a photo shoot in the field I use the second card to back up the photos taken. The point is though, that failed card was a brand new Lexar card, and defects do happen even from a reputable company, even to any reliable and robust product. And, what are the chances that BOTH memory cards fail at the same time?

Card failure is only a myth until one experienced himself/herself. I had that not once but twice in the the field in past. And I am actually in the wafer equipment tech industry and I know how much confidence I have with the idea of putting all my eggs (pictures) in one basket ( XQD card), LOL.

 

[TN Args]

During the 3 years using my D810, I did have a SD card failure once, I would have lost all the photos taken before then if I hadn't backed them up on the second card. For me that's my habit, any time I have a break from a photo shoot in the field I use the second card to back up the photos taken. The point is though, that failed card was a brand new Lexar card, and defects do happen even from a reputable company, even to any reliable and robust product. And, what are the chances that BOTH memory cards fail at the same time?

Card failure is only a myth until one experienced himself/herself. I had that not once but twice in the the field in past. And I am actually in the wafer equipment tech industry and I know how much confidence I have with the idea of putting all my eggs (pictures) in one basket ( XQD card), LOL.

Are you one of the top engineers in the industry?

If so, what is the engineering measure of failure rate for SD cards?

 

[New Day Rising]

XQD is far more robust and reliable than SD. You're literally more likely to have BOTH SD cards fail in a Sony vs. the XQD in the Nikon D850 or Z camera.

What is your source, please.

Sony and Nikon both stated that the XQD card format is more robust and reliable.

It's not a secret.

But here's what I was told by Nikon last year: The XQD format is 5 times more durable than SD.

So, Nikon are basically saying to you that all their other cameras that use SD cards are not reliable and really shouldn't be trusted for professional work like weddings. Really?

As others have noted being durable and being resistant to data integrity are not the same thing.

I'll take a much faster single tougher XQD over 2 slower more failure prone SD cards any day. I do think the Z7 should have had a 2nd slot of some kind, but the Z6 is superior to a Sony a7III with two SD slots. XQD is awesome.

Rob

 

[New Day Rising]

Imagine this scenario...

You have been out on safari all day getting shots of a lifetime of lions, leopards, cheetah, and elephants...

Sunset is coming and you are now sitting on the edge of a cliff setting up to do a landscape pano when you realize your 256GB XQD card is nearly full. You pop the card out of the camera and set it on top of your bag and you put in your secondary 256GB XQD. A big gust of wind comes up and blows your bag which causes the XQD card to fall out and then it gets blown off the edge of a cliff and now, it is gone! One slot means your day of awesome shots are completely gone. Two slots, with one as backup or at least as JPG means you still have your photos.

Alternative scenario 1: Sunset is coming and you are now sitting on the edge of a cliff setting up to do a landscape pano when you realize your 256GB XQD card is nearly full. You pop the card out of the camera and set it on top of your bag and you put in your secondary 256GB XQD. A big gust of wind comes up and blows you off your perch on the edge of the cliff and now you're gone! One slot, two slots makes not a sod of difference. Your loved ones (we hope) miss you. They don't care how many slots you had.

The odds of this happening versus your scenario - roughly the same, I reckon. Change it to your safari vehicle crashing and you dying? The odds have gone up a whole lot.

Alternative scenario 2: See below. Let's just hope you got that second card out before the lion ate your shiny new camera!


Photo credit: Thomas Selig/Daily Mail

While this scenario may not be one that would happen often, if it happened to me just once it would be once too much. Secondary slots aren't always just about card failures!

Now, to be clear I am not saying I refuse to buy a camera with a single card slot. I am saying that it is a risk that some aren't willing to take. If I was a wedding or event photographer there is no way in hell I would use a body with a single card slot as my main body. A single ruined shoot could ruin a new wedding photographer's career.

Look, I think other things being equal a second slot is going to be better. But once we start debating at the level of chance of gusts of wind blowing memory cards of cliffs in Africa, I kind of think we might be missing the bigger picture.

--
Happiness lies in thinking or doing that which one considers beautiful - HIK

 

[michaeladawson]

Someone on FM had an interesting take -- it could be Nikon did this on purpose while they hone the lineup, to keep the pros on the DSLRs (and dual slots) until they're ready to push pro-level mirrorless.

I don’t buy that. If the Z mount is up to the specs for pro use why do something to make it undesirable for pros. If it’s not up to pro use they won’t buy it. Plenty of reasons not to buy the Z without resorting to removing a card slot.

 

[TN Args]

ONE XQD slot is more reliable than 2 SD slots.

XQD is far more robust and reliable than SD. You're literally more likely to have BOTH SD cards fail in a Sony vs. the XQD in the Nikon D850 or Z camera.

One of the primary selling points of XQD (beyond speed) is that it's practically bulletproof compared to SD.

Have a great weekend!

Rob

Have you found any objective reliability specs such as MTBF. I looked and didn't find anything.

MTBF is probably not an applicable measure, and would be deceptive anyway.

Remember, the fretting here is not about any and all forms of card failure: it is about the specific type of failure where the card allows the images to be written on it, but then fails in such a manner that those images cannot be read off it. Plus, cannot be recovered with recovery software.

It does not include many, many other failure modes that stop the camera recognising the card, because then it says 'No card" and you put another one in, and no photos lost.

So what we need to find is the frequency of occurrence of the one, specific failure type that irrecoverably loses images after they have been taken. You are not going to find that, not only because it is such a small category of sub-failure, but because most of the situations that could lead to it involve thoughtless or abusive card management by the user. You don't want to count those modes either.

Of course, if you are actually a thoughtless and abusive card manager while working professionally for paying clients, then, firstly, you are disrespecting your clients and probably should find other employment for their sake, and secondly, good luck with a two-slot camera because there are plenty of ways you can wreck both cards at the same time.

If your preferred model of camera for paid work happens to have only one slot, then if you:

• buy top quality cards from a reputable supplier;
• replace them every two years or so, or whenever an event occurs that concerns you;
• when you buy a new card, before first time used, test each card with a full read-write cycle and check for errors (eliminating the risk of the card being faulty upon purchase, the most likely cause of failure other than abuse);
• never modify the card's contents off-camera and re-insert and keep shooting -- always reformat if you modify the contents off-camera;
• other general good practice and care;
• (optional, if you can't help fretting) change card several times during a paid session and/or use a wireless transmitter to send photos in real time to off-camera storage;

....then you can proceed with confidence that irrecoverable loss of images due to good-practice card failure is one of the least likely ways that you could lose images (at least several of your lifetimes of weekly paid gigs per failure), and you should be fretting about all the other things that could go wrong and ruin the session's images.

cheers

 

[Evidentiary]

ONE XQD slot is more reliable than 2 SD slots.

XQD is far more robust and reliable than SD. You're literally more likely to have BOTH SD cards fail in a Sony vs. the XQD in the Nikon D850 or Z camera.

One of the primary selling points of XQD (beyond speed) is that it's practically bulletproof compared to SD.

Have a great weekend!

Rob

Have you found any objective reliability specs such as MTBF. I looked and didn't find anything.

MTBF is probably not an applicable measure, and would be deceptive anyway.

Remember, the fretting here is not about any and all forms of card failure: it is about the specific type of failure where the card allows the images to be written on it, but then fails in such a manner that those images cannot be read off it. Plus, cannot be recovered with recovery software.

It does not include many, many other failure modes that stop the camera recognising the card, because then it says 'No card" and you put another one in, and no photos lost.

So what we need to find is the frequency of occurrence of the one, specific failure type that irrecoverably loses images after they have been taken. You are not going to find that, not only because it is such a small category of sub-failure, but because most of the situations that could lead to it involve thoughtless or abusive card management by the user. You don't want to count those modes either.

Of course, if you are actually a thoughtless and abusive card manager while working professionally for paying clients, then, firstly, you are disrespecting your clients and probably should find other employment for their sake, and secondly, good luck with a two-slot camera because there are plenty of ways you can wreck both cards at the same time.

If your preferred model of camera for paid work happens to have only one slot, then if you:

• buy top quality cards from a reputable supplier;
• replace them every two years or so, or whenever an event occurs that concerns you;
• when you buy a new card, before first time used, test each card with a full read-write cycle and check for errors (eliminating the risk of the card being faulty upon purchase, the most likely cause of failure other than abuse);
• never modify the card's contents off-camera and re-insert and keep shooting -- always reformat if you modify the contents off-camera;
• other general good practice and care;
• (optional, if you can't help fretting) change card several times during a paid session and/or use a wireless transmitter to send photos in real time to off-camera storage;

....then you can proceed with confidence that irrecoverable loss of images due to good-practice card failure is one of the least likely ways that you could lose images (at least several of your lifetimes of weekly paid gigs per failure), and you should be fretting about all the other things that could go wrong and ruin the session's images.

cheers

Thanks. I agree with your commentary. MTBF by itself can be very misleading and is almost always misinterpreted, but a relative comparison might be somewhat of an indicator and I have not seen any objective data. That said, the improved physical attributes look positive.

 

[XeroJay]

I guess you haven't figured out yet that XQD and SD both use the same type of NAND memory, and that even if it were less prone to failure, it's still just as vulnerable to corruption. Whatever though.

 

[XeroJay]

ONE XQD slot is more reliable than 2 SD slots.

XQD is far more robust and reliable than SD. You're literally more likely to have BOTH SD cards fail in a Sony vs. the XQD in the Nikon D850 or Z camera.

One of the primary selling points of XQD (beyond speed) is that it's practically bulletproof compared to SD.

Have a great weekend!

Rob

Have you found any objective reliability specs such as MTBF. I looked and didn't find anything.

MTBF is probably not an applicable measure, and would be deceptive anyway.

Remember, the fretting here is not about any and all forms of card failure: it is about the specific type of failure where the card allows the images to be written on it, but then fails in such a manner that those images cannot be read off it. Plus, cannot be recovered with recovery software.

It does not include many, many other failure modes that stop the camera recognising the card, because then it says 'No card" and you put another one in, and no photos lost.

So what we need to find is the frequency of occurrence of the one, specific failure type that irrecoverably loses images after they have been taken. You are not going to find that, not only because it is such a small category of sub-failure, but because most of the situations that could lead to it involve thoughtless or abusive card management by the user. You don't want to count those modes either.

Of course, if you are actually a thoughtless and abusive card manager while working professionally for paying clients, then, firstly, you are disrespecting your clients and probably should find other employment for their sake, and secondly, good luck with a two-slot camera because there are plenty of ways you can wreck both cards at the same time.

If your preferred model of camera for paid work happens to have only one slot, then if you:

• buy top quality cards from a reputable supplier;
• replace them every two years or so, or whenever an event occurs that concerns you;
• when you buy a new card, before first time used, test each card with a full read-write cycle and check for errors (eliminating the risk of the card being faulty upon purchase, the most likely cause of failure other than abuse);
• never modify the card's contents off-camera and re-insert and keep shooting -- always reformat if you modify the contents off-camera;
• other general good practice and care;
• (optional, if you can't help fretting) change card several times during a paid session and/or use a wireless transmitter to send photos in real time to off-camera storage;

....then you can proceed with confidence that irrecoverable loss of images due to good-practice card failure is one of the least likely ways that you could lose images (at least several of your lifetimes of weekly paid gigs per failure), and you should be fretting about all the other things that could go wrong and ruin the session's images.

cheers

Thanks. I agree with your commentary. MTBF by itself can be very misleading and is almost always misinterpreted, but a relative comparison might be somewhat of an indicator and I have not seen any objective data. That said, the improved physical attributes look positive.

Nope. See what happened to us just a few weeks ago here: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4304727?page=1

 

[GodSpeaks]

I do not EVER recall seeing a film camera that took 2 rolls of film and recording to both simultaneously.

Yet the "pros" and enthusiasts survived with only a single capture. And then survived the perilous procedures required to turn that undeveloped film into images.

I am NOT saying that dual card slots are not useful. I am saying that digital images captured onto memory cards is far less perilous than film was.

Just trying to put "some" perspective onto this.

 

[EE-TV]

Imagine this scenario...

You have been out on safari all day getting shots of a lifetime of lions, leopards, cheetah, and elephants...

You get struck by lightning.

There's an earthquake.

Your camera doesn't turn on. Oh no, a piece of man-made tech fails on you! Cry us a river! That's life folks! **** happens!

Even if you were shooting 'royalty' and you lose all your pictures. Oh well. There are people a lot worse off than you in the world, Mr. High and Mighty with all his gear. A lot worse! The majority of people bust their *** just to pay the rent, and there's you worrying about their 'money shot'. Get over it.

This is getting old now.

This is not the type of logic that I want coming from someone photographing my wedding.

A person like you treats those images like a paycheck, and not like the memories that they represent. The images that photographers are hired to capture are cherished moments, that are worth much more to the client than a simple refund.

My cousins photographer lost a set of images on her wedding day, I am not sure how.... but my cousin still tears up thinking about talking about it. Thats BS, that you would just say "Oh well... sorry I lost your pictures, thats life".

Solution: Hire 2 Photographers!

 

[tqlla]

I do not EVER recall seeing a film camera that took 2 rolls of film and recording to both simultaneously.

Yet the "pros" and enthusiasts survived with only a single capture. And then survived the perilous procedures required to turn that undeveloped film into images.

I am NOT saying that dual card slots are not useful. I am saying that digital images captured onto memory cards is far less perilous than film was.

Just trying to put "some" perspective onto this.

 

[tqlla]

Imagine this scenario...

You have been out on safari all day getting shots of a lifetime of lions, leopards, cheetah, and elephants...

You get struck by lightning.

There's an earthquake.

Your camera doesn't turn on. Oh no, a piece of man-made tech fails on you! Cry us a river! That's life folks! **** happens!

Even if you were shooting 'royalty' and you lose all your pictures. Oh well. There are people a lot worse off than you in the world, Mr. High and Mighty with all his gear. A lot worse! The majority of people bust their *** just to pay the rent, and there's you worrying about their 'money shot'. Get over it.

This is getting old now.

This is not the type of logic that I want coming from someone photographing my wedding.

A person like you treats those images like a paycheck, and not like the memories that they represent. The images that photographers are hired to capture are cherished moments, that are worth much more to the client than a simple refund.

My cousins photographer lost a set of images on her wedding day, I am not sure how.... but my cousin still tears up thinking about talking about it. Thats BS, that you would just say "Oh well... sorry I lost your pictures, thats life".

Solution: Hire 2 Photographers!

Well I certainly wouldnt hire a photographer that says "Cry us a river! That's life folks! **** happens!" after losing their clients photos.

 

[MrHollywood]

I'm not a fanboy of any kind. I do however have an opinion that a dual card slot is preferred and even necessary in certain situations.

I can't believe that anyone has a hard time understanding this.

I’ts clear to me. Some people prefer dual slots. Others don’t don’t share that preference. Some are pros, some are not. One could predict that those who prefer dual slots will not buy into Z; and that person could be wrong. Or not. I pre-ordered a Z6. Can anyone do more than guess what my preference is?

My guess is that you're a realist and don't worry about incredibly rare issues, like card failures. I also suspect you want a better version of the Df, a fun camera that will deliver more versatility to your kit. That's what the Df did for many and it stayed in production longer than ANY other DSLR!

And it had one card slot.

Rob

I do suspect that my Df will be looking for a new home soon after my Z6 arrives. That reminds me, I need to order an XQD card.

BTW, I’ve left my spare at home more than once to gain the extra luggage space.

LOL. I sold my Df and it was a mistake, but I am looking at the Z6 as a perfect replacement. The idea that it will add some VR to my ART lenses and work with almost all of my Nikon glass...silent shutter and much more. I really am excited.

I'm going to wait for more reviews, but unless something of a practical nature pops up, I'll be ordering. I'm not sure I'll start with native lenses until the faster stuff comes along.

Did you order a native lens as well?

Rob

Since my D850 arrived (ours delivered within days of each other, I recall), the Df hasn’t seen too much action. That my Z6 might replace the Df wasn’t really in my mind when I placed my order, but the notion has grown over the last 24 hours.

If a glaring problem comes up, I can always cancel, I suppose. I just didn’t want to get into that Purgatory with the D850 again.

I didn’t order Z glass, only the adapter. I want to see how some of my MF glass works on it first (and my 28-70/2.8, though not so sure about the balance on top of the adapter). If I do decide to go new, I’m thinking probably the 35 to start.

Gotcha. I'll take the chance and wait. I waited a bit on the D850 (best camera I've ever used) and I still got one without much drama.

How the D6 stacks up against the Z6 in low light will be interesting.

Rob

 

[MrHollywood]

ONE XQD slot is more reliable than 2 SD slots.

XQD is far more robust and reliable than SD. You're literally more likely to have BOTH SD cards fail in a Sony vs. the XQD in the Nikon D850 or Z camera.

One of the primary selling points of XQD (beyond speed) is that it's practically bulletproof compared to SD.

Have a great weekend!

Rob

Have you found any objective reliability specs such as MTBF. I looked and didn't find anything.

MTBF is probably not an applicable measure, and would be deceptive anyway.

Remember, the fretting here is not about any and all forms of card failure: it is about the specific type of failure where the card allows the images to be written on it, but then fails in such a manner that those images cannot be read off it. Plus, cannot be recovered with recovery software.

Yup.

It does not include many, many other failure modes that stop the camera recognising the card, because then it says 'No card" and you put another one in, and no photos lost.

Exactly.

So what we need to find is the frequency of occurrence of the one, specific failure type that irrecoverably loses images after they have been taken. You are not going to find that, not only because it is such a small category of sub-failure, but because most of the situations that could lead to it involve thoughtless or abusive card management by the user. You don't want to count those modes either.

I had an SD card fail on me, but I abused it in bag full of tools by mistake. But I bet an XQD would have survived. Your point is well taken.

Of course, if you are actually a thoughtless and abusive card manager while working professionally for paying clients, then, firstly, you are disrespecting your clients and probably should find other employment for their sake, and secondly, good luck with a two-slot camera because there are plenty of ways you can wreck both cards at the same time.

Yup.

If your preferred model of camera for paid work happens to have only one slot, then if you:

• buy top quality cards from a reputable supplier;
• replace them every two years or so, or whenever an event occurs that concerns you;
• when you buy a new card, before first time used, test each card with a full read-write cycle and check for errors (eliminating the risk of the card being faulty upon purchase, the most likely cause of failure other than abuse);
• never modify the card's contents off-camera and re-insert and keep shooting -- always reformat if you modify the contents off-camera;
• other general good practice and care;
• (optional, if you can't help fretting) change card several times during a paid session and/or use a wireless transmitter to send photos in real time to off-camera storage;

....then you can proceed with confidence that irrecoverable loss of images due to good-practice card failure is one of the least likely ways that you could lose images (at least several of your lifetimes of weekly paid gigs per failure), and you should be fretting about all the other things that could go wrong and ruin the session's images.

cheers

And there you have it.

Rob

 

[MrHollywood]

I do not EVER recall seeing a film camera that took 2 rolls of film and recording to both simultaneously.

Yet the "pros" and enthusiasts survived with only a single capture. And then survived the perilous procedures required to turn that undeveloped film into images.

I am NOT saying that dual card slots are not useful. I am saying that digital images captured onto memory cards is far less perilous than film was.

Just trying to put "some" perspective onto this.