Jump to content

Trouble with new SanDisk Ultra 16gb cards


meino

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just out of curiosity - do the other brands face a similar rate of counterfeiting as SanDisk? Is there any reason why everybody seems to prefer SanDisk for their M9s? If there are so many counterfeit SanDisk cards around, would one gain any advantage through buying Lexar instead, for instance?

 

I've been using a SanDisk Extreme 16 GB (30MB/s), a SandDisk Extreme III 4GB and a Lexar 16 GB (133x) without any problems whatsoever, for the past six months. Not a single corrupted image, no problem at all. I don't fill the cards completely and I reformat the card in the camera after each download to the PC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Michael, I agree in principle but there is one practical matter: It's impossible for Leica to check every change a card maker makes.

 

Extreme IIIs are good one day, then the manufacturer makes a change and the cards don't work as well. As Karl-Heinz has said, the cards should work as well so long as the manufacturer holds to the definition of the standard. But that isn't always the case.

 

In the matter at hand, we agree that it's up to Leica to bullet-proof their card-writing capabilities, but I think it's out of the question that they be asked to continually update cards lists at the whim of the card manufacturers' changes.

 

All lists go out of date. We might be better served by not making lists at all than by trusting them blindly. :confused:

 

Howard, I completely agree.

 

This is a bit of a 'chicken or the egg' argument, ultimately. My contention is that Leica make the hardware/software fully compatible with the SDHC standards, and this will all be a moot point.

 

Apparently, they made it 'compatible enough' to work with some cards, but not optimally with all cards, hence the reason for the list. As the cards have changed over the last two years, even this information is suspect at best, and creates a considerable amount of confusion in the fora. What once was fine, is no longer.

 

This is a disappointing level of design sophistication that makes me question their ability to keep in the digital market as time advances.

 

---Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope not.

Please, read the next level of detail - if you haven't already done so.

I didn't want to post B&H's text here.

 

Cheers, K-H.

 

It's not just marketing, from what I can tell.

 

The "low power / power off" protection of even the "older" Panasonic Gold SD cards (non- UHS) has evidently been independently verified from a number of different places. Certainly I experience no problems with the 4GB and 8GB versions, even when ignoring the battery level of the M9.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Howard, I completely agree.

 

This is a bit of a 'chicken or the egg' argument, ultimately. My contention is that Leica make the hardware/software fully compatible with the SDHC standards, and this will all be a moot point.

 

Apparently, they made it 'compatible enough' to work with some cards, but not optimally with all cards, hence the reason for the list. As the cards have changed over the last two years, even this information is suspect at best, and creates a considerable amount of confusion in the fora. What once was fine, is no longer.

 

This is a disappointing level of design sophistication that makes me question their ability to keep in the digital market as time advances.

 

---Michael

 

This assumes that all card manufacturers follow the standard to the letter - my understanding is none of them do, but use "close enough" engineering. The best idea would indeed be for Leica to increase the software tolerance for card errors, like other camera makers seem to have done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not just marketing, from what I can tell.

 

The "low power / power off" protection of even the "older" Panasonic Gold SD cards (non- UHS) has evidently been independently verified from a number of different places. Certainly I experience no problems with the 4GB and 8GB versions, even when ignoring the battery level of the M9.

 

 

Exactly, I also like this feature Smart data writing.

That is one of the techniques used that made SSDs commercially viable.

Upon reflection, I am surprised that not every manufacturer is using this well established technique -

if that should actually be the case.

I certainly don't plan to buy any memory cards for use in my M9 anymore that don't have these kinds of features.

 

K-H.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This assumes that all card manufacturers follow the standard to the letter - my understanding is none of them do, but use "close enough" engineering. The best idea would indeed be for Leica to increase the software tolerance for card errors, like other camera makers seem to have done.

 

I have to agree.....

 

And the 'speed' business is pure hype to get us gullible customers to pay yet more money.....

 

As a result they are presumably pushing the processing power of the card to the limit and compromising some other essential features in the process....

 

Same occurs with web pages, web browsers and HTML...... all resort to non-standard coding to achieve the desired novel effects and speed things up.... with consequent incompatability issues with some browsers........

Link to post
Share on other sites

Err.....It depends on the buffer the camera has. I have run out of buffer so many times capturing birds in flight I can't count. Or at concerts. So write time is extremely important so you don't miss the next shots. Not even mentioning sporting events :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends on your style. Personally i never run out of buffer when photographing birds in flight, as I will not even use C. But then I would suggest the M9 is not the ideal camera for that application at all, as 135 mm is rather short, and the Visoflex so slow that you measure needed writing time in minutes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The card on the right appears to be a fake. I can't tell 100% from te photo but real Sandisk cards have a small notched out bit at the bottom of the card. The one on the left has this but I can't see the one on the right card. Maybe it's the shadow. If it doesn't have the notch then it's highly likely a fake. You can also tell from the quality of the print on the label. A corse dot pattern an be a good give away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know sandisk are good and have a few but one thing about getting other cheaper brands (integra, transcend) is that no one forges them :)

any of these class 6 should be fine on the M9

 

lastly I don't buy the stuff about 4gb and 8gb being more reliable. I have only ever used 16gb with m9 and m8 and they are fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

other cheaper brands (integra, transcend) is that no one forges them :)

any of these class 6 should be fine on the M9

 

I can see a marketing oppeotunity for Leica to start reselling cards which work at a markup.

 

Noel

Link to post
Share on other sites

The card on the right appears to be a fake. I can't tell 100% from te photo but real Sandisk cards have a small notched out bit at the bottom of the card. The one on the left has this but I can't see the one on the right card. Maybe it's the shadow. If it doesn't have the notch then it's highly likely a fake. You can also tell from the quality of the print on the label. A corse dot pattern an be a good give away.

That is well spotted! The plastic looks different too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The card on the right appears to be a fake. I can't tell 100% from te photo but real Sandisk cards have a small notched out bit at the bottom of the card. The one on the left has this but I can't see the one on the right card. Maybe it's the shadow. If it doesn't have the notch then it's highly likely a fake. You can also tell from the quality of the print on the label. A corse dot pattern an be a good give away.

 

I just checked the cards, and both have the notch. I also checked the print on the label Iusing a loupe, but I don't see any difference in the print quality. I have read some of the articles about fakes, but the right one doesn't show a course dot pattern which is a sign of a fake.

 

regards

Meino de Graaf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...