Memory card problem...

Wheaten59 · Sep 6, 2007

I was shoting in continuous on my 30D. Taking pics of my son pitching and I would only get off about 7-9 pics at a time and the camera seemed to bog down, it seemed as though it couldn't keep up. Is this because of the card I'm using (Transcend)? If so, what type of card should I be using?

Iron Flatline · Sep 6, 2007

What camera are you using? Chances are it has to do with the buffer and is subsequently systemic - it's not the card, it's the camera.

TCimages · Sep 6, 2007

It's the buffer, not the card. 7-9 sounds normal, Assuming you're shooting large jpgs or RAW.

S2K1 · Sep 6, 2007

It could be the memory card, or the mode you're shooting in. The Canon 30D has a buffer memory that stores the pictures until it can write them to the memory card. In JPEG mode you can fire off 30 pictures before it stops you. In RAW mode, 11 pictures, in RAW+JPEG, 9 pictures. If it is cutting off before this in your specific mode, I'd replace the memory card. In my experience, it's best to get name brand(Sandisk, Lexar) cards and ones that'll keep up with the camera(something that writes at 10MB/sec. or faster preferably).

Garbz · Sep 7, 2007

Boggind down is due to the Card. The buffer is full and then it needs to wait for writeouts to be done.

TCimages · Sep 7, 2007

Garbz said:
Boggind down is due to the Card. The buffer is full and then it needs to wait for writeouts to be done.

Are you sure about this? I thought the card speed only affected (marginally in my experience) the speed in which the buffer was depleted, not the number of pictures the buffer can retain.
No matter what the card speed, the buffer will fill becasue it's capacity and speed are pre-determined. No?

Also, most images are different sizes, so the number of images the buffer can retain may not be static.

I may be wrong, but the card speed could really only impact the time in which you could begin taking pictures again, not how many you can take in a burst.

Edit: I re-read this, and I think we may be saying the same thing. I was thinking of the number of pictures taken which was mentioned by the OP.

Jeff Canes · Sep 7, 2007

i think it's the card too, had same think happen to me with low speed cards that go for around 20 USD

Jon, The Elder · Sep 7, 2007

S2K1...has it pretty well. CF cards are not the place to cut corners. They will probably outlast a couple of camera bodies.

I took a seies of 28 .jpgs, tracking a horse at a trot. Took about 4 seconds to clear the buffer. I use a MINIMUM of Ultra II quality SanDisk cards. Extreme III is the best overall.

Wheaten59 · Sep 7, 2007

I was shooting large jpgs. I thought I'd be able to get more pics than I did in continuous shooting.

S2K1 · Sep 7, 2007

If you were shooting JPEGs, I'd say it's the memory card. I'd go with like Jon said, a minimum of Ultra II Sandisk or Lexar Platinum 80x.

Wheaten59 · Sep 7, 2007

Thanks guys it's much appreciated.

TCimages · Sep 7, 2007

Wheaten59 said:
I was shooting large jpgs. I thought I'd be able to get more pics than I did in continuous shooting.

wow, that is very slow for JPGs only. Try a different card, but my stubborn brain is still not seeing how a slow card has anything to do with the number of images the buffer can hold.
You should still get around 30 in the buffer and have longer to wait for it to empty.

Sorry, I meant JPEGS + RAW or RAW in my earlier post. S2K1 cleared it up tho

Wheaten59 · Sep 7, 2007

Now I'm starting to wonder if my camera is not working properly. :grumpy:

TCimages · Sep 7, 2007

Wheaten59 said:
Now I'm starting to wonder if my camera is not working properly.

I wouldn't worry until you try a new card. It may fix all the issues. Don't be alarmed by what is probably my misunderstanding.

Try this:
Take your camera and put it in manual mode and turn the auto focus off. Then hold down the shutter button until the camera stops or slows down. Count the number of shots.

This is a silly question, but you didn't have the flash on when you only got 7-9 images, right?