# consensus 4gb vs 8gb?



## mJs (Dec 23, 2009)

I generally use 4gb compact flash cards, and have heard that the 8gb cards can become unstable... from your experience is there much truth to this?  I was recently given an 8gb card, but am wary of using it... i can still take it back...

thoughts, comments?


----------



## thebeatles (Dec 23, 2009)

I just bought a 16GB card  Hope that wasn't a bad purchase  I'm curious about this too as I've heard rumors.


----------



## PatrickHMS (Dec 23, 2009)

If you lose a card, potentially full or near full, would you rather lose 4, or 8, or 16GB of images if it were to fail?

As easy as they are to change out, won't 4GB (or 8GB max) hold plenty for most of us as far as one single outing with our cameras?

These larger cards can also be expensive to buy, so why not reduce the potential amount of data that can be lost, as well as expense when you lose that one card to a failure?

16GB of storage of  4 x 4GB (or 2 X 8GB) cards is still 16GB of storage.

I have several 4GB cards, several 2gb cards, and for me I don't need bigger, nor do I want smaller cards.  These smaller capacity cards are also faster to copy files from.

Happy shooting!


----------



## mJs (Dec 23, 2009)

PatrickHMS said:


> If you lose a card, potentially full or near full, would you rather lose 4, or 8, or 16GB of images if it were to fail?
> 
> As easy as they are to change out, won't 4GB (or 8GB max) hold plenty for most of us as far as one single outing with our cameras?
> 
> ...



While I agree with everything that you have said here.. I had asked for more storage cards (even specified 4gb ) for xmas as I am doing a 2 week trip to cuba with no computer to download to, and am hoping to capture lots of images to bring back.  I just was hoping to get some feedback as to whether anyone has experienced failure of 8gb+ cards, and if i should exchange it for 2 - 4gb cards


----------



## Garbz (Dec 23, 2009)

It's a religious debate. Some would argue that it's better to have a small card fail and only lose part of the days shooting. I would argue it's better not to have to swap cards because you increase the chance of losing a half a day's shooting. 

Realistically card failure due to actual failure (rather than breaking it, accidentally formatting it etc) is rare. The risk increases with the age of the card. Go with an 8gb now, you can always buy a second 8gb card when they cost nothing in a few years.


----------



## PhotoXopher (Dec 23, 2009)

I agree, go 8gb... it's the perfect size card if you shoot RAW in my opinion, if you don't shoot RAW - 4GB would be ideal.


----------



## PatrickHMS (Dec 23, 2009)

Garbz said:


> It's a religious debate. Some would argue that it's better to have a small card fail and only lose part of the days shooting. I would argue it's better not to have to swap cards because you increase the chance of losing a half a day's shooting.
> 
> Realistically card failure due to actual failure (rather than breaking it, accidentally formatting it etc) is rare. The risk increases with the age of the card. Go with an 8gb now, you can always buy a second 8gb card when they cost nothing in a few years.


 
And I agree with what you say, but I come from a long career in IT, where you learn to expect failure and prepare for it.

Most all of us have likely met "Murphy" and his law when we were not expecting it.  Always seems to happen at the worst possible time.

I just tend to go smaller, as I have seen a couple of cards fail, and in one case someone formatted a card when they shouldn't have.  For me, smaller 4GB cards just lower exposure to losing photos, and I can store two or three full cards in my bag almost as easily as I can keep one until I get back home to offload them.  

I realize that a card failure is rare, but I just don't want it to happen to me, nor do I want to lose much data if it does.

But consider me a conservative old fart - I can also remember when a pc came with less than 10-12GB of hard drive storage, and was considered to be huge at the time.

And not so long ago, an IBM 370 mainframe computer, one that would host the online application for all the teller's terminals all over town, ran with 1MB of memory.  The computer room was full of rows of disk drives, all combined having a total storage capacity of less than the PC we each use to read this posting.

And nowadays, our wristwatches, cellphones and appliances have more processing power than did those 1970's mainframe computers.


----------



## Brieff (Dec 23, 2009)

I've got one 8GB card.. And 4GB somewhere, but I don't use it daily..
Usually I shoot about 2GB photos during one shoot.. (I shoot RAW + large jpeg) and after that I immediately put them to my computer. And some days later I edit them and download to internet.. The edited files.. I rarely have any use for the originals.. So I don't really take multiple backups.. 

Thew 8GB was just because my parents bought me _one_ card and... Sometimes I need more capacity.. Usually if I travel somewhere and don't have my computer with me. 

Also it's easier for me to have just one card.. I always know where it is beacause I use it almost every day. If I had 4 different cards I would lose 2 of them during the first week ;__;


----------



## itznfb (Dec 23, 2009)

I use 8gb cards. I started having issues with my SanDisk Extreme III's and I switched to Lexar. The Lexar cards are much faster (at the same rated speed) and seem to be more reliable.


----------



## KmH (Dec 23, 2009)

I too prefer the 4GB card size for 10-12 MP camera bodies. I cring at the thought of losing more than that at one time.

I really want to use 2 GB cards but the logistics from having so many cards starts to become problematic.


----------



## NateWagner (Dec 23, 2009)

Really? Lexar cards are more reliable than Sandisk? I have pretty much never heard complaints against SanDisk reliability. 

As for 4gb vs. 8gb. I find that I get about 350 raw images per 4gb card that I use (on a 40D) for me that's plenty, and I just change out cards when I need them (I have 7 4gb cards and a smattering of 2 and 1 gb cards). 

If and when I get a 5D2 or 1Ds2 (or 3) I maybe upgrade to 8gb cards just because of the bigger file sizes, and the video. But for my purposes now, a 4gb is absolutely fine.


----------



## itznfb (Dec 23, 2009)

NateWagner said:


> Really? Lexar cards are more reliable than Sandisk?



I don't know. So far they have been for me personally. I used SanDisk for years though I've only been using these Lexar cards for about 6~9 months. I was getting a lot of corrupted files on my 2 D90's and recently my D300s with my SanDisk cards. I haven't had any corrupted files with the Lexar cards.

All cards are either 8gb or 2gb.


----------



## NateWagner (Dec 23, 2009)

huh, haven't heard of that problem. ahh well, I guess now I have.


----------



## itznfb (Dec 23, 2009)

NateWagner said:


> huh, haven't heard of that problem. ahh well, I guess now I have.



Just some searching around I've seen a few posts here and there with the same issues I saw. Doesn't seem like a widespread issue. It does always seems to be Nikon/SanDisk though. The same SanDisk cards I have work fine and never corrupt in a Canon P&S I have.


----------



## NateWagner (Dec 23, 2009)

that's really odd. I know a lot of wedding photogs that use the SanDisk cards. But then again I think most of them use Canon. 

That's an odd phenomenon for it only to occur on Nikon.


----------



## mJs (Dec 23, 2009)

when i posted, i had a feeling it was going to be one of those questions that had been debated before....

Thanks to everyone that has responded... I think I'm going to be safe rather than sorry and go exchange it for the two 4gb cards... seeing as I'm also shooting my cousins wedding while I'm down there, and like my life (she would probably kill me if anything happened to her photos...) 

Thanks again!


----------



## KmH (Dec 23, 2009)

itznfb said:


> NateWagner said:
> 
> 
> > Really? Lexar cards are more reliable than Sandisk?
> ...


And that points up one of the things about the Internet and forums, people have to be aware of.

Your's or someone else's experience, *by itself*, is anecdotal and statistically useless. 

If the same thing happens to 10,000 people, there is a trend.


----------

