Extreme3 8 gig compact flash 34.99

Midwest photo exchange is selling 8gig extreme 3 compact flash cards for 34.95 the day after thanksgiving. They are taking pre orders now if you want to go ahead and order them and they will process the payment on friday. here is the link: http://view.exacttarget.com/?j=fe68...c077b7413&jb=ffcf14&ju=fe3215757465077b731072

and the phone number is 614-261-1264.

 

For most cameras thats an excellent deal, just a note, however, if your camera is UDMA compatible, using the Extreme III will give you a performance decrease. Look for the Extreme IV in that case.

 

Uh oh, I ordered three for my D300...

 

I think we just discovered why they are such a good deal. :er:
Do you ever use the Extreme III before?

 

Here's the thing though, the d300 was out for almost a year before the extreme IV was out... Maybe I'll be good

 

Yeah I have the 4 gig version and it works fine.

 

Maybe you won't notice the difference. On my D200 I definitely did and I would not even think about plunking anything less than a Extreme IV in it. I'm looking for deals on a SanDisk Ducati edition Extreme IV. I just picked up 2 extra Exteme IVs when I ordered the D700.

 

I use them in My D300 and D700 and have had no problems. You should note there are 2 versions of the extreme 3, on is 20 mb/s and the newer one is 30 mb/s.

Both will perfome very well in the camera, the only real difference I have found is in the downloading of the cards. (2 min vs 3 min for 4 gig via Firewire)

 

I noticed the difference between the Extreme III and IV on my D200... in the writing times. Take 10 rapid pics and then watch the light that indicates CF card being written to... the III's were several seconds longer to complete the same task than the IV's. On a USB 2.0 connection, both will download at about the same speed as both are well below the transfer rates of USB 2.0. This is if you are using the much faster USB 2.0 card reader and not straight from the camera, which is known to be a LOT slower.

If you are a slow picture taker, your camera buffer is never going to be taxed and you will honestly never know the difference, but if you need to do quick bursts, short wait and more bursts, the IV's have a very clear and wide advantage.

 

Dude that is a great deal. Are you serious? Unless the OP is doing any professional work where EVERY second counts (and he is filling the D300's internal buffer) - the III's are MORE than sufficient.

I just fired off 23 in succession RAW files, and it took them 22.216 seconds to write to the Extreme III 8G (30MB/S version). So the question is, are you going to be in a situation where you will:

A) Be shooting in RAW and need to fire off 23 shots one after another?

B) Be unable to wait between shots for 5 seconds or less to allow the buffer to refill to a point where you can get off another 8/10 shots?

C) Not be able to shoot in JPEG-Fine mode and take advantage of the higher buffer.

 

Thank you for posting the sale price. I could probably use one of these cards as I typically don't need to write to the camera very quickly with the sort of thing I typically shoot.

I do appreciate the heads up, Jerry. I didn't know there was a difference.

 

Yes, very. Why would I post a joke, to maybe hurt his feelings?

According to YOUR standards as you do not know the OP personally and shoot with him.

It may or may not be right for him... it may also be an incredible deal as I mentioned. I also appreciate that he took the time to inform the good people here of that deal. But in the end it is up to him to decide, but knowledge is power. Obviously he was not aware of this until I mentioned it and he looked up if his camera was UDMA capable or not. He just learned something new and at least NOW can make a more intelligent choice in the future or at least decide if he wants to go for faster cards. I wasn't bashing him or his choices, I was polite and stating facts.

I pulled the D200 out and did the same test using III and IVs. Mine was 27 seconds for a 25 shot burst, so it supports your approximation. However, the IVs did the same thing in 17 seconds on the D200 and 11 seconds on the D700 using IVs. Heck of a difference. Yes, there is also a heck of a difference in price too. A IV is not going to be found for under $100 at this time (I paid $103 for a couple Extreme IVs).

... should be:
Does it make a difference for YOU or not.

For me, it makes a hell of a difference. I did not spend several thousand dollars on a camera setup to wait for it. Along the same lines, I also will not use kit or cheap lenses on it, nor will I use cards that impede it's performance. That is me, it may or may not be you, but you will kindly permit us to each have our on opinions and preferences.

I'm no pro, but I did several weddings and I do a ton of portrait photography. Yeah, I fire off a lot of volleys where I won't want to wait when my model is in a flow. Sometimes I am limited by my lighting recycle times, often, I am not and demand that speed from my camera and many times my D200 did not keep up. My D700 will. The IVs made a big difference for me in those times.

Doesn't work like that. Once the buffer is full, shots come out hellaciously slow. Whether your buffer is filled to 25% or 100%, once you stop and writing starts, its slow until the buffer contents are written to disk. If your disk is slow, it is slow. And no, 5 or 25 seconds is way too long when you need it. I do not need it every time I pickup the camera, but man, I appreciate every second less that I have to wait, when I *do* need it.

I will never sacrifice quality and convenience for speed. I also would NEVER shoot JPG unless I totally did not care what I was shooting, which is damn rare. Even when playing, my D200 is set to RAW and my D700 is set to the highest quality 14-bit RAW. Everything I do in photography has a reason for it and thats a personal choice, one that each one of us will have to make.