I used XQD cards with my Nikon D500. I started using CF Exp B cards when I moved to the Z series Nikon cameras. I now use CFExp B exclusively in the Z9. Looking at testing of the cards seems like a fairly unhelpful way of deciding which cards to buy.
I have a couple of Delkin Power 128Gb cards. They do well in the tests. My other CF Express B cards are: a Sony Tough 128, Lexar 128, Delkin Black 150 and a 512 Delkin Power card.
It would be interesting to see a set of (up to date) tests of actual in camera tests. The question is what sort of things should we be assembling so consumers can actually know which cards suit specific needs?
Fps at full RAW - but what does that mean?
FPS RAW in different cameras?
Compressed RAW @ 20 Fps?
Temperature after a burst of 30 seconds?
I bought the Delkin Power 512Gb in a sale because I wanted a card for video @4K. I knew it was not designed for 8K video and that is fine. (It does 4K well enough for my needs.)
It is probably worth identifying a couple of levels of performance. What would they be?
High capacity cards with fast write times are not always the ideal card. They are expensive. An ideal set up would probably consist of a collection of less expensive cards and a few higher end cards.
My XQD cards are still in use. They work just fine in my Z6II. They can be used successfully on the Z9 and in some cases outperform some CFExp cards. With the Z9 I shoot 15fps using HE* but sometimes switch to 20fps.
I am aware that the in camera read/write speeds are different from the theoretical maximum speeds tests in a computer show.
How useful are the sites you have found giving test results? What tests do you think are most useful? Do you plan to buy a range of different capacity and speeds of cards?
Hudson Henry has an interesting video where he tested a few cards and readers: Approaching the Scene 197: Testing Compact Flash Express B Cards & Readers - YouTube
___________________________________________
Pascal Hibon
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/phibon/
Website: https://pascalhibon.net/
Thank you for starting this thread. Since I regularly use high speed burst capture, I often run into write speed limitations with CFexpress B cards. I will soon have a very fast card available for testing. I am currently considering the design of my test. The test should be standardized so that it can be used with other cards in the future and the results are comparable. At the same time, I want the test to reflect real-world use as much as possible. If you have any tips or suggestions for the test design, please post them here in the forum. Thank you very much.
@libor-vaic My starting point would be limited by my expected use as a Z9 and Z6II shooter.
When I am out looking for birds the FPS and burst rates are what I am interested in. In reality I need to be sure that I can get around 20 to 30 seconds but I would like to know it could be longer.
When taking portraits in the studio I don’t need high speed, so I can buy cards which cost less for studio work .
I think the tests people will be most interested in are:
A) High speed high megapixel camera burst time with biggest file size. In camera testing, 3 tests averaged.
- How long can it go before buffering (Some cards have no limits, so can it do60 seconds @ full speed?)
- How long @ reduced speed (on Z9 that would be 15fps)
- How long at full speed using the second level of compressed raw? (on Z9 that would be 20fps with HE*)
B) Video
- Can it do 8K video at the cameras most demanding setting for 60 minutes? 120 minutes?
- Can it do 4K video ….
C) Claims vs performance
- Does it meet the claimed usage?
There are obviously more things which count.
- Transfer speed with USB 3.1 g2 readers etc.
- Temperature after bursts.
@delange Thanks for the reminder. I watched his video again.
He did identify the two kinds of performance types. Slow but affordable and fast and expensive. Things have changed since he released that, however. Some new generation cards from Delkin and ProGrade, for example.
Some cards at entry level like the Delkin Power 128Gb offer high speed performance. The larger Delkin Power cards (256, 512) are slower and don’t appear to have the sustained write speed.
Hopefully someone will attempt an updated set of tests on more affordable cards and look at the improvements in performance of newer releases where there are claimed performance improvements.
I did test the buffering of the Delkin Black 150 card at full 20fps and Lossless compressed on the Z9. It seemed to go indefinitely. However I did the test twice. It is tricky to tell if 20 fps was always maintained. It did seem that there were some very slight very brief periods where it slowed. It kept going but maybe it dropped to 15 fps. I had no way to tell. In any event the cards just continued. On the second test, I stopped holding the button down after a while . I will never need that many shots. It was a such a long burst.
@libor-vaic The problem with standardising a test is that current hardware (cameras) will probably not be able to put future cards to their limit. So eventually, you need new hardware to test cards, and to be fully comparable, you would also have to re-test the older cards with the new hardware.
Of course, you can just test the effective read/write speed (I imagine there is some kind of benchmark solution for that), but then you loose the real-world relevance.
@griffallo Thank you, Griffallo. That's exactly my point. Put the card in the most demanding camera and test its limits on it. Your suggested testing methods are basically the same as mine. It's good that you mention replication in the testing. That's a very scientific approach. Still, it will be necessary to create a standard test scene since the RAW size is not constant. With a difference of almost 10 MB per frame, it can make a really big difference when shooting sequentially. The only solution would be to replicate on a large number of different scenes so that these differences can be neglected.
@nightjar Good point Nightjar, thank you. This is why I think it is important to test the cards on cameras like the Nikon Z9. I'm assuming that developments in card write speeds won't go so far that I won't be able to fill the Z9's buffer anytime soon. When that happens, I guess there will be no choice but to switch to another camera. But that will be when today's cards are irrelevant for any comparison. Just move the reference point and move on. Of course, this breaks the continuity that allows for historical comparisons.
Still, it will be necessary to create a standard test scene since the RAW size is not constant.
What about just setting the camera with the lens cap on at maximum extended ISO? The image should be noisy, fairly random, so be fairly constant in size since the compression algorithm will have very little to work with.
Testing is unlikely to be fully standardised across all cameras. It would however be nice to have some agreed tests.
For Nikon users the Z9 test at full resolution counts as a key test. but it isn’t the only one that matters. Not every card has to be designed for wildlife and action. Video sustained speed is probably different again.
- It’s nice to have a few slower cards for studio portraits or landscape partly because they are a lot cheaper.
- It may make sense to have a scene or something which changes so that the file size is not the same all the time.
@jpolakphotography not a good setup IMHO. All cameras add a layer of processing when ISO is very high, adding more overhead and slowing things down. Plus, it is not a very realistic scenario anyway.
I think the best way to test memory cards is by excluding a camera altogether. A properly controlled setup on a computer, with the fastest port and card reader. Run some benchmarks that do extensive reading and writing, measure this across different brands and types of cards…
@megaz At thessdreview.com they do set up a card test using computer drive connection. There is a menu system option where you can select to look at CFExpress card tests. It does test theoretical maximum speed. I am certain that the in camera performance will actually be different. I have found it interesting but the tests may lead to unrealistic expectations of speed.
I can confirm that the Delkin Power 128Gb card is a good performer both in their tests and in my Z9.
@griffallo, yes, cameras will certainly show different results, because they don't have the same throughput as a dedicated PC connection. Since it can vary from camera to camera, that's another reason why you don't want to use those for tests...
@megaz Alternately there are not many cameras where the CFExpress Type B is the primary card storage. If tests using the relevant most demanding flagship cameras (Nikon Z9, Canon R5 {R1? eventually}?) were done, that should provide very clear information to compare with actual SSD computer based tests.
How does each card do? What is the difference between the flagship camera results and the computer based test? What can we learn from looking at the results?
It is the top end flagship camera where the performance of the card actually makes a difference. My Z6ii for example doesn’t need a CFExp fast card for the things I use it for. My Z9 is a different story.