Frequently Bought Together
Product DetailsSize: 32 GB
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
Product Description
Size: 32 GB
Dedicated to fulfill the demanding requirements of performance-conscious photographers, Transcend proudly releases its Extreme 400X CompactFlash cards. The Transcend 400X CompactFlash memory card allows the professional photographers and enthusiasts to get the most from your digital single lens reflex (DSLR) camera. Users are guaranteed to make consecutive shooting and non-stop video recording and share their digital artwork with the world!
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
147 of 150 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars
informal test results for this 400x card indicate...this baby is fast!
September 23, 2010
Size Name:32 GB
If you need a fast high capacity CF card at a reasonable price, Transcend's 32GB (Blue) card is a good choice. This 400X card has a maximum read speed of 90MB/sec, and more importantly a write speed of 60MB/sec.
Shooting photos at maximum quality (saving both JPEG and RAW files), I was looking for a faster card for my Canon 7D an 18 megapixel digital SLR. The results using this card are excellent. The 7D has a burst rate of 8 frames per second, and the camera's buffer is large enough, so that you can easily shoot a 10 or 15 shot burst, without the camera locking up. Of course it takes some time for the camera to write to the card after such a burst, so I did a quick comparison using the Transcend 400x card, a Kingston 266x card, and a Transcend 133x card. I took a 10 shot burst, and then measured the time between the last shot and when the frame counter in the display stopped blinking, roughly indicating that data had finished writing to the card. The results of this crude test were, that the 400x card took 5 seconds, the 266x card 15 seconds, and the 133x card 25 seconds. Increasing to a 15 shot burst, the results were, 7.5 seconds for the 400x card, 22 seconds for the 266x card, and 37 seconds for the 133x card.
My tests are informal, and your results may vary, but these findings may provide some rough indication of the performance the card is capable of. I have used it on a couple of shoots, and haven't experienced any delays, while the camera writes to the card.
I have heard various professional photographers recommend using smaller cards, usually 8GB, rather than 16GB or 32GB cards. The thinking is that cards will eventually fail, and they feel more comfortable having their images from a particular shoot (usually a wedding), on several cards rather than on one card. That way if a card happens to fail, they will not lose all the images from that one event. While that kind of approach may make sense to someone shooting a wedding, I like having a card with enough capacity to shoot an entire event, and not have to worry about running out of memory or changing and keeping track of cards. Using a 7D, a 32GB card is good for about 950 images, which is great for photo shoots with models, shooting on a trip, or an extended event, like a basketball tournament, or runners in a marathon.
With camera file sizes increasing, "large capacity" is a relative term. So that 8GB card that was "huge" a couple of years ago, is kind of "small" today. Someday soon, the same will probably be true of even 32GB cards. Transcend's new 64GB (Blue) compact flash card may seem excessive, but digital SLR's being capable of shooting high definition video, has raised memory requirements to a new level. And finally, while using bigger cards may be more "risky" for some, for others they are more convenient, and they are generally less expensive per GB.
Due to good performance and reliability over several years, Transcend is a brand that I have come to trust for both compact flash and SD memory cards. Transcend cards are usually less expensive than equivalent cards by SanDisk or Lexar. They have a lifetime warranty, but fortunately I haven't had a Transcend card fail yet. If you do happen to get a bad card when buying from Amazon, replacement is usually a fast and hassle free process. This 400x card is fast, and at this time is a very good deal for under $100.
Shooting photos at maximum quality (saving both JPEG and RAW files), I was looking for a faster card for my Canon 7D an 18 megapixel digital SLR. The results using this card are excellent. The 7D has a burst rate of 8 frames per second, and the camera's buffer is large enough, so that you can easily shoot a 10 or 15 shot burst, without the camera locking up. Of course it takes some time for the camera to write to the card after such a burst, so I did a quick comparison using the Transcend 400x card, a Kingston 266x card, and a Transcend 133x card. I took a 10 shot burst, and then measured the time between the last shot and when the frame counter in the display stopped blinking, roughly indicating that data had finished writing to the card. The results of this crude test were, that the 400x card took 5 seconds, the 266x card 15 seconds, and the 133x card 25 seconds. Increasing to a 15 shot burst, the results were, 7.5 seconds for the 400x card, 22 seconds for the 266x card, and 37 seconds for the 133x card.
My tests are informal, and your results may vary, but these findings may provide some rough indication of the performance the card is capable of. I have used it on a couple of shoots, and haven't experienced any delays, while the camera writes to the card.
I have heard various professional photographers recommend using smaller cards, usually 8GB, rather than 16GB or 32GB cards. The thinking is that cards will eventually fail, and they feel more comfortable having their images from a particular shoot (usually a wedding), on several cards rather than on one card. That way if a card happens to fail, they will not lose all the images from that one event. While that kind of approach may make sense to someone shooting a wedding, I like having a card with enough capacity to shoot an entire event, and not have to worry about running out of memory or changing and keeping track of cards. Using a 7D, a 32GB card is good for about 950 images, which is great for photo shoots with models, shooting on a trip, or an extended event, like a basketball tournament, or runners in a marathon.
With camera file sizes increasing, "large capacity" is a relative term. So that 8GB card that was "huge" a couple of years ago, is kind of "small" today. Someday soon, the same will probably be true of even 32GB cards. Transcend's new 64GB (Blue) compact flash card may seem excessive, but digital SLR's being capable of shooting high definition video, has raised memory requirements to a new level. And finally, while using bigger cards may be more "risky" for some, for others they are more convenient, and they are generally less expensive per GB.
Due to good performance and reliability over several years, Transcend is a brand that I have come to trust for both compact flash and SD memory cards. Transcend cards are usually less expensive than equivalent cards by SanDisk or Lexar. They have a lifetime warranty, but fortunately I haven't had a Transcend card fail yet. If you do happen to get a bad card when buying from Amazon, replacement is usually a fast and hassle free process. This 400x card is fast, and at this time is a very good deal for under $100.
110 of 117 people found the following review helpful
By WilliWu
Size Name:16 GB
Works perfetly in all Canon EOS 7d HD Movie modes. I purchased two of them along with my 7d and have just ordered a 32 GB Transcend to extend HD movie capacity from 48 min with this 16 GB to 96 min.
May 2011 Update: While this 400x Transcend continues to work perfectly with my 7d under almost all conditions, I have recently found one condition where the faster 600x Transcend MIGHT make a very modest difference. When you are shooting RAW at 8 frames per second with this 400x, the camera slows down to about 1 frame per second after the buffer is full -- about 16 shots. This would also happen at 600x, but I dont know how much it would improve. I just performed an experiment with my 32 GB 400x Transcend/7D and got the following number of shots off in five seconds:
1. Large JPG only: 39 shots (buffer never overloads).
2. Large RAW only: 23 shots (slows down after 16 shots). *
3. Large RAW plus Large JPG: 17 shots. (slows down after 7 shots) *
In summary, there is no reason for 7D owners to spend the big bucks to go from 400x to 600x for video and probably no significant improvement even for 8fps RAW. Check out the table on page 59 of your EOS 7D Instruction Manual and do the math for yourself. High speed (8fps) RAW generates about 200MB/s while the 400x cards and 600x cards handle only 60MB/s and 90MB/s respectively. Also note than if you are shooting RAW + JPEG, you can more than double your burst length by going to RAW only and converting later. Burst capability is therefore much more about the camera's buffer size and processing speed than about card speed. I have concluded that this 400X Transcend is the one for me and find no reason to spend more. If you are a 7D/600x owner who wishes to repeat this test with a 600x Transcend, I would greatly appreciate your reply to this post. For me, it would be an expensive experiment.
* Updated 8-4-2011, Note that this was for the 32GB card, the 16GB card might produce slightly different results.
* Update 2012: Canon introduced a major firmware upgrade this year that significantly improves on these processing times and adds other useful enhancements. If you have not yet upgraded to version 2.0.3, you should do so now.
May 2011 Update: While this 400x Transcend continues to work perfectly with my 7d under almost all conditions, I have recently found one condition where the faster 600x Transcend MIGHT make a very modest difference. When you are shooting RAW at 8 frames per second with this 400x, the camera slows down to about 1 frame per second after the buffer is full -- about 16 shots. This would also happen at 600x, but I dont know how much it would improve. I just performed an experiment with my 32 GB 400x Transcend/7D and got the following number of shots off in five seconds:
1. Large JPG only: 39 shots (buffer never overloads).
2. Large RAW only: 23 shots (slows down after 16 shots). *
3. Large RAW plus Large JPG: 17 shots. (slows down after 7 shots) *
In summary, there is no reason for 7D owners to spend the big bucks to go from 400x to 600x for video and probably no significant improvement even for 8fps RAW. Check out the table on page 59 of your EOS 7D Instruction Manual and do the math for yourself. High speed (8fps) RAW generates about 200MB/s while the 400x cards and 600x cards handle only 60MB/s and 90MB/s respectively. Also note than if you are shooting RAW + JPEG, you can more than double your burst length by going to RAW only and converting later. Burst capability is therefore much more about the camera's buffer size and processing speed than about card speed. I have concluded that this 400X Transcend is the one for me and find no reason to spend more. If you are a 7D/600x owner who wishes to repeat this test with a 600x Transcend, I would greatly appreciate your reply to this post. For me, it would be an expensive experiment.
* Updated 8-4-2011, Note that this was for the 32GB card, the 16GB card might produce slightly different results.
* Update 2012: Canon introduced a major firmware upgrade this year that significantly improves on these processing times and adds other useful enhancements. If you have not yet upgraded to version 2.0.3, you should do so now.
88 of 94 people found the following review helpful
By Sushi Chef
Size Name:32 GB|Amazon Verified Purchase
The performance seems to match or exceed the requirements of Canon 5D Mk II and does not cause any problem while taking pictures or shooting HD video. Most demanding picture format on 5D Mk II is RAW + JPEG (Fine+Large), and 32GB card can usually hold more than 900 of those.
Most Recent Customer Reviews
5.0 out of 5 stars
Compact Flash.
No problems, It is the compact flash that I use all the time. Holds tons of pictures and is very reliable
Published 1 day ago by Nancy Lariviere
1.0 out of 5 stars
Dead on arrival
I was looking forward to trying this Transcend 32 GB Compact Flash Card but unfortunately it was DOA. I couldn't format it in any camera or computer. Read more
Published 2 days ago by JD
1.0 out of 5 stars
Cheap but it failed after 14 months with loss of data
I bought the 64Gb version for use in a Canon 7D. Worked perfectly, till a few days ago when it failed without obvious reason. Read more
Published 3 days ago by Andre
4.0 out of 5 stars
Transcend 400X - 64 GB Compact Flash Memory Card TS64GCF400 (Blue)
I use this in the 5D2, mostly for HD video, sometimes for panoramas(via Gigapan controller, 1200 to 1800 shots jpeg large),and neither of these seem to stress the card. Read more
Published 4 days ago by CIRE
4.0 out of 5 stars
Good price for a 32GB CF Card
Really good price for a 32GB CF card. Seems fast enough to capture good HD video. No problems with it so far.
Published 4 days ago by Steph D.
4.0 out of 5 stars
Works fine in D800.
I use it in Nikon D800. Card works fine. I have another Transcend card from 6 years ago and both cards perform as designed.
No need for speed in my case. Read more
No need for speed in my case. Read more
Published 5 days ago by GOVA
5.0 out of 5 stars
flash card with lots of memory
It is nice to not have to worry about changing the flash card every week, just download as it goes and then save them, price is right and can order more in case external hard drive... Read more
Published 6 days ago by Cheryl G Ovard
5.0 out of 5 stars
Transcend CF review
No trouble with the card so far. Everything is working well and picture quality is perfect. Postage was fast and efficient although the box was possibly a little too big. Read more
Published 9 days ago by Emma
4.0 out of 5 stars
It works
CF cards are getting a lot more expensive relative to SD cards. On older DSLRs you do not have a choice. Read more
Published 10 days ago by C. K. lau
1.0 out of 5 stars
16gb Transcend
I am very disappointed in this card. I have now had 6 16 gb Transcends go bad in the first couple of months of having them. Read more
Published 12 days ago by Tim Ludvigsen
|
|
|||||||
|