I will be writing this review for both SanDisk Extreme SDHC class 10 8gb and Transcend SDHC class 10 16gb.
I bought SanDisk class 10 and Transcend class 10 for my new Panasonic LX5. I got both card because no one really did a comparison with a compact camera and I was just going crazy trying to see if there is any big difference between the 2 cards.
SanDisk Extreme package box indicated it's water proof, x-ray proof, shock proof, temperature proof. I am not ready to spend $50 to see if it really stand up to it's words. And I don't think normal people would go through the extreme condition in taking pictures or videos.
Cut the story short, I really want to see if there is any difference in writing performance between the 2 cards in a compact camera. There is a continuous burst mode in LX5 and the manual indicated it is only limited by the condition of picture environment and performance of the SD card. Within the mode there are 2 different settings:1) speed priority or 2) picture/quality priority. The shutter speed is much faster with speed priority compare to picture priority.
I first formatted both cards out of box then put each card in series of test(3 rounds each setting for each card) shooting at the same object under same lighting condition. The results:
SanDisk Class 10 8gb
22-33 shots before camera stopped to allow the card to catch up with writing.
Transcend Class 10 16gb
22-24 shots before camera stopped to allow the card to catch up with writing.
SanDisk Class 10 8gb
34-46 shots before camera stopped
Transcend Class 10 16gb
27-33 shots before camera stopped
It seems that at a higher shutter speed, both cards performed very similar under the same shooting condition. But at a slower shutter speed the SanDisk definitely out perform Transcend. I hope this little experiment satisfied anyone with curiosity like me. Transcend definitely is a bargain with 16gb and almost half of the price compare to SanDisk. But I am going to use SanDisk Extreme as my primary card and Transcend as backup or on a second camera to ensure i would not miss any shots.
This video review is misleading and a fraud. But that's only a bad thing for SanDisk as this Transcend card is literally more than 99% as fast as the most expensive SanDisk card you can buy for a Nikon D90. Hell, this video is the reason I bought the SanDisk card.
In the video review where he states "...The difference is the SanDisk card can capture 100 photos at fine resolution in 24 seconds. The Transcend card captures 66 photos in the same time/resolution" he is lying. I too have a Sandisk Extreme III card, a Transcend Class 10, a Transcend Class 6 card and a Nikon D90. I repeated this frame rate test at several resolutions. At EVERY resolution, there is EXTREMELY LITTLE frame rate difference between these cards. The truth is that even Transcend Class 6 cards offer essentially the same frame rate at the same resolution as the most expensive SanDisk card you can buy. The ONLY way you can get a D90 to shoot at maximum advance rate for 100 shots (without any buffer lag) is to drop to a low resolution and AS LONG AS YOU ARE RUNNING TRANSCEND CLASS 6 OR HIGHER, YOU WILL GET THE FASTEST FRAME RATE A NIKON D90 OR D7000 CAN MUSTER.
I also own a Nikon D7000 that shoots at a substantially faster maximum advance AND writes MUCH larger files. At highest resolution of RAW + Fine Large jpeg, the difference between this Transcend Class 10 card, the SanDisk Extreme III and a Transcend Class 6 card is insignificant. We're talking about approximately 0.2 frames difference in a 4-second burst at Continuous High advance. All cards burn down the buffer in less than 2 seconds and then you are in jerky buffer-restricted advance at the same rate regardless of card.
Food for thought: SanDisk marketed their Extreme 30MB/second cards as BOTH Class 6 and Class 10 at different times. They are the same cards. The TRUE difference between Class 6 and Class 10 is, wait for it... MARKETING. Wonder why Transcend Class 6 cards cost about the same as their Class 10 cards? Probably because they perform the same and likely ARE the same...
This and the Transcend Class 6 card get 5 stars because they are literally over 99% as fast as the SanDisk "30MB/s" cards at a fraction of the price. Do NOT waste your money on SanDisk cards. They do not improve frame rate over Transcend Class 6 or 10 cards nor do they transfer to computer any faster. I'd only give the SanDisk cards 2 stars because they perform well but are EXTREMELY overpriced.
on November 6, 2010
DO NOT BUY THIS CARD UNLESS YOU WANT TO PLAY RUSSIAN ROULETTE WITH YOUR DATA. Card worked fine when I bought it, but malfunctioned within the first 400 photos -- malfunctioned so badly that some very technical tools were needed to recover anything at all, and some photos were still permanently lost. Recovering the data requires the attention of a serious data recovery expert or someone with substantial technical knowledge and lots of time.
I made the mistake buying this card for my camera right before a long trip overseas. It worked fine on the first few dozen shots. I didn't see any improvement in speed over my trusty 1.5-year-old Transcend 8GB Class-6 card, but that was most likely because the camera itself (Canon EOS Rebel 1000D/XSi) could not write images any faster than that (full-size JPEG, continuous shutter mode, roughly did ~2.5-3 images/second on both cards, with no slowdown after the first few shots).
200 shots or so into using this card, I get a sudden mysterious message from the camera when I try to take a new shot -- Card Format Invalid (never saw it in the previous 1.5 years on this camera with 3 other SDHC cards). I look around for a bit, and discover that turning the camera off, pulling the card out and putting it back in is enough to clear the error message, and the previous photos are still visible.
I then make the mistake of assuming the problem is just that -- needing to "reboot" the camera when the card is acting stupid, and nothing else. Over the next 200 or so shots, this problem comes up every 50 shots or so. Then, after yet another "reboot", I notice that the camera's playback function is only showing the last 30 photos!!! Yet it shows that there's only 5.7G of space left on the camera -- the other 2G+ _should_ be taken up by the photos I've shot thus far, but the playback doesn't show them.
And this happens in the middle of a trek through the Peruvian Andes, several days' walk/horse ride from the first village with electricity, let alone a computer (with lots of once-in-a-lifetime shots on the camera). I pull this card out immediately, plug in my backup card, and wait until coming back to civilization to take a look at the card. Sure enough, the card is severely corrupted -- the directory listing is showing a bunch of folders with weird-character names, and only the last ~30 photos are visible from the computer, too!
Hopefully you'll read this before buying and will not buy this piece of junk card. If you had the misfortune of running into the same problem and losing your data, read on.
I have now had time to examine what was left on the card, using tools that are not easily usable to people without substantial technical training. I've managed to recover over 90% of my photos, but this was NOT easy, and I suspect that even some shops specializing in data recovery from failed disks may not know how to get your data back -- this is NOT as simple as just undeleting a file!
1. As soon as you see the FIRST error involving the card format, turn off the camera, pull out the card, and copy all of your photos to a different device (computer/harddrive/whatnot). The earlier you stop using this card, the safer your photos will be.
2. As soon as the first problem happens, move the little plastic slider on the side of the card to the "Lock" position -- this will prevent anything else from being written on the card, which lowers the risk of what's left of your photos being overwritten.
3. If you see directories (aka folders) with weird names when you plug this card into a computer -- or see a huge number of photos missing when you look at them on the camera, take the card out IMMEDIATELY, and take the card to a data recovery shop or a technical expert willing to look at the card in depth. Give them a printout of the explanation below.
At least in my case, the filesystem was indeed somehow damaged, perhaps by the camera deciding to write over the location of the root directory somehow. I took a full disk image of the card, and operated on the disk image only (there were no read errors when making the image, FWIW). Somehow I was lucky enough to have the original _subdirectories_ \DCIM and \DCIM\100CANON survive on the card intact even though the root directory structure now pointed to a different, new, place on the filesystem as \DCIM.
I found the location of the old 100CANON directory on the filesystem by searching for one of the filenames I knew would exist in the old directory, like IMG_7000, across the whole disk image.
I then edited the filesystem (yea, with a hex editor!) to have the new \DCIM directory point to the old 100CANON subdirectory. See the Wikipedia article on FAT32 for a reasonably easy reference on how to find the 4 bytes that need to be edited, and how to calculate the correct updated value.
Mounting the edited disk image (with Linux's 'mount -t loop'), the directory was intact, and all but about 5% of the photos were completely intact as well -- the remainder must have been overwritten after the directory structure got corrupted. Depending on how long it takes the user to notice a problem, of course, much more damage could easily happen to the original data.
Here's one easy hack to see how much you can hope to recover, if you're recovering camera data. The same trick may be useful for locating the JPEGs if the original image-containing directory is no longer intact (good luck with recovery then! I thankfully didn't have to do this). Take any image produced by the same camera, look at its JFIF headers. My camera leaves the string "Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XS" in two places in every JPEG it creates, early on in the JFIF header. Search for that string across the whole filesystem. If there's, say, 500 hits, that means you can hope for [easy] recovery of at most 250 photos -- any photo that is missing the JFIF headers will be missing the first chunk of the file, and will make it very hard both to find _and_ to reconstruct the remaining data, if any, into a usable JPEG (I have not tried to do this, at least, and it seems very hard).