No insult taken Joe. The speed issue is kind of what I'm thinking about here. A 512 GB SD UHS ll V90 which writes at 300 MB/s is $500 at one place I looked. The same size cfexpress is $150. The 512 GB UHS ll V60 is the same $150 as the cfexpress but half the write speed. My concern here is if I am in a situation that I'm using continuous shooting that I'll bottleneck with the slower card.
Wow, what are you shooting that needs all that expensive speed? Video? Then I'd understand.
Photos, which is where I still concentrate, "A 512 GB SD UHS ll V90 which writes at 300 MB/s is $500" sounds expensive. Do you need 512GB? ($399 at
B&H now)
I'm not doubting, I just want to understand, why such a large and fast card? If it's for video, I understand, it's out of my area. 128GB BLACK UHS-II SDXC Memory Card $139
I don't have a dual slot camera,
yet, but if it's like anything else in electronics, the system is only as fast as the slowest link in the system chain. So a fast card in one slot and a slower in the other, would only be as fast as the weakest link. If shooting RAW+JPG that could be interesting and yes the size goes up a little faster than just RAW.
Someone needs to answer, what I'd wonder if I was doing this. How does the RAW+JPG change the capacity of the buffer, the speed and number of images. I shoot JPG only because of what I do, and I need the full speed and buffer, now and then. It's rare, but, I feel necessary, to not have the buffer full and to have the fastest burst rate, at normal. I don't use (H), way too many photos to review and edit.
But mostly, why A 512 GB SD UHS ll V90 which writes at 300 MB/s?