Jump to content

Testing Cards - How will I know if it's fast enough?


Recommended Posts

Hello. I have a few cards that don't say v30, but I saw some videos where one can test to see if in fact they are fast enough.

E.g. I have a Sony 64GB Class 10 UHS-1/U3 SDXC up to 94MB/s


It seems to be working trying to record XAVC S 4K, 30p, 140M 4:2:2, 10bit after about 5-10 min.

Can I trust that this will work then or might it crap out after longer shooting?

How do I know when it fails? Is there a warning or does it stop recording, or does one see it only in the quality of the file somehow, like video stutter or a corrupt file?

In terms of v30 cards which I also have, I'm likely only going to shoot as high as the above setting... will they all be fast enough? In what cases will they not be? e.g. slow motion, s&q, etc?





Link to post
Share on other sites

When I bought Sony camera; in the kit, the gift added was SanDisk Extreme 150MB/s; V30 128GB.

Starting video recording with top level features, works with that card and other cards similar type, capabilities; but if I put some other card, not capable enough, camera shows alert at the display.

In case, the videos are important, needed for some purpose, would not be recommended to play with some cards with lower specifications. Anything else, worth a try.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Many cameras do not test the actual performance of memory cards, only speed markers. That is why the new Sony A7m4, FX30, ZV-E1 cameras - require a speed marker on the card from V30 to V90. This is if we talk about SD drives. Here everything is like in SSD. Speeds are listed everywhere great, but in fact not all cards allow to use them for recording for a long time.

I recommend the Kingston Canvas React Plus UHS-II SDXC V90 Memory Card (300/260). I use the FX30 myself for DCI 4K XAVC S-I 24/25/50 fps and HEVC 50/100/120 fps recording. The SanDisk Extreme Pro UHS-II cards are also decent. I've had less than a dozen SDs from Sony, it's hard to keep stats. And they are expensive.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Posts

    • I mostly see posterization artifacts, which are the result of lossy compressed RAW files (or bad jpeg conversion). Unfortunately, the A6400 doesn't offer uncompressed or lossless compressed RAW. The noise might indeed result from the smaller sensor than what you're used to. If you're not shooting at max aperture, you could try shooting at wider aperture and lower ISO. When you're not shooting at max aperture, fullframe versus APS-C shouldn't matter much in terms of ISO-performance combined with depth of field: at the same ISO and aperture value, fullframe offers better noise performance but with a narrower depth of field. This can be offset by choosing a larger aperture and lower ISO on the APS-C camera. If you want a fullframe camera the size of an A6400, try the A7C(ii).
    • ..unfortunately, the lighting was correct. The shot required deeper shadows. The K1 ff didnt have these banding issues [yes, I know the sensor is larger]. The film shots had details in the same light. The sony files, both the jpg and raw, had this banding/noise - with NO retouch or post adjustments [straight out of the camera]. the camera was purchased new a few years ago and I am trying to determine if there is something wrong, or the settings are wrong, or the camera just cant handle this kind of lighting [studio + softbox]. No shadow detail is one thing... banding/noise in the shadows is unacceptable. Does sony have a body this size that is FF ? Im wondering if that would make a difference..  dw
    • The root causes for banding are uneven lighting, incorrect exposure settings, or compression artefacts or certain kinds of artificial lighting, especially LED lights. Also the lens used plays a role, I have noticed it more with my sharpest lenses, looks like they outresolve the sensor when I have a uniform blue sky. There is more than one solution, and ultimately post-processing, but the root cause has to be identified first.
  • Topics

  • Create New...