Hi!

After long wait the XF100 has been shipped to me. I'm upgrading from Sony FX1.
I'm looking for cheap & reliable CF cards, because I need at least 32GB (or 2x16GB). What card have you tested?
I know Canon recomends Sandisk Exteme and Lexar Professional, but maybe DVINFO forum users have tested other cards? I don't need slo-mo. I just need good & reliable 50mbit 422.

Stick only with the cards Canon recommends. One person here reported using the cheap Transcend 400x card, only to get a buffer error 10 minutes later from the camcorder. I currently use the USD130 Lexar 400x 32gb CF card, which is working great. Will get some more soon.

I wish I can use cheaper CF cards, but not worth the risk, at all.

Hi Michal,

I use the SanDisk 16gb Extreme without incident. BTW, this is a subject that has been beat to death in this forum - just scrub around and you'll find more info than you can imagine on this topic - or - just type in Doug Jensen's name;-)

Also, it has been my experience that Cheap and Reliable are two words that do not belong together, especially in professional applications.

Another thing - invest in the Nexto, you'll be glad you did.

Cheers

Canon have taken an extraordinary step of recommending (and TESTING) specific products for their camera, and I suspect that this is for good reason. A 50mbps data stream can cause problems for a less-than-optimal CF controller design, and could result in disaster in the field. I've bought Sandisk Extreme Pro cards, and hope these let me sleep at night.

I sent the Transcend cards I initially purchased back to Amazon.

OK, so I'm thinking about gettting Sandisk Extreme.
What do you think about models SDCFX-016G-X46 and SDCFX-032G-X46? Will they work with slo-mo and so on?

I just got the xf100...charging it as I write this. I got 2 16gb 600x transcend cards recommended by canon and BH. Anyone on here have these cards and have had issues?

You shouldn't, I have a Lexar 400x 32gb card, and it records the entire 79 mins without problems. I haven't tried slow-mo yet, and won't since I do it in post if I want slow-mo.

Don't settle for cheap on this front. Buy the best and the most recommended.

Don't be a pony; be a horse.

Or just be a tiger.

rawwr

We are only recommending the very fast cards....Hoodman 675x or the new Delkin Combat 625x...when we used the Delkin 450x, they choked after 5 minutes. The Canon codec is big......"so don't go small!"

Jim Martin
FilmTools.com

Canon have approved the 600x Transcend Cards, so hopefully they will do the job.

Canon have approved the 600x Transcend Cards, so hopefully they will do the job.They are approved but with the caveat that they are Not operational when using slow motion modes whereas the Sandisk cards are certified as Fully operational in all modes. Personally I only purchase Sandisk Extreme cards for my XF105 & XF305 as it seems nuts to buy a card that won't work properly if I should choose to use a slow motion mode especially as the Transcend cards aren't even cheaper than the Sandisk Extreme cards!

We are only recommending the very fast cards....Hoodman 675x or the new Delkin Combat 625x...when we used the Delkin 450x, they choked after 5 minutes. The Canon codec is big......"so don't go small!"The Hoodman cards aren't even on Canon's official list of blessed cards while the Delkin CombatFlash are Not operational when using slow motion modes Canon U.S.A. : Professional Imaging Products : XF300 (http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/camcorders/hd_video_cameras/xf300?selectedName=Specifications)

it's a pretty poor show from Canon. It appears as though the only media that will fully work are Sandisk and some other brand I've not heard of. Is this a specific card problem (or limit to what card can do), or do you think a future firmware will sort this restriction/incompatibility out?

Dear Friends,

I would like to jump in here.

Axtremex has been trying hard to get their 128 GB CompactFlash card full qualified for use with the Canon XF 300 and XF 305.

This has been very difficult due to the tragedy in Japan.

Axtremex has made changes to their 128 GB card. After these changes the card has been thoroughly tested by a third party in the XF 305. This new version of the card works well in the XF 305, including the Slow and Quick Modes.

I need to emphasize two things:

1. These are new versions of the Axtremex 128 GB cards, the original versions would not work with the XF 300 and XF305.

2. The testing has not been performed by Canon. They are just not in a position to test cards at this time. Thus they will not be listed on the Canon website at this time.

These new cards will be available at www.nanoFlash.net (http://www.nanoFlash.net) soon.

Keep us posted on that 128gb card, decent deal compared with Sandisk 64gb prices.

have to ask again - does anyone think that Canon will sort this problem out with the other cards, or are the other cards just not good enough?

Who's fault is it? Canon tech, or CF card tech?

Dear Friends,

It is not that other cards are not good enough (or fast enough in some cases),
it is that the other cards just do not work in the Canon XF 300 and XF 305.

I know that Axtremex worked very hard to determine why their cards would not initially work in the XF 305.

Their Research and Development Department then determined what was needed to make the cards work.

The Axtremex 64 GB 600x Plus cards will work.

And the new versions of the Axtremex 128 GB 600x cards will work also.

Axtremex has been working on this for the past few months.

Just to be clear, some cards, from other manufacturers, are not fast enough, or the right type of card.

Dan, with the cards that don't work - do you think this is something that could be solved with a firmware/software update on either cards or camera?


I bought 4 x 16GB Transcend cards. I stupidly didn't look at the smallprint on the canon site saying that they could not do slow motion recording. Pretty disapppointed, and I've not opened the cards out the the box yet (ordered from US to the UK so cannot really return) so could still sell them on I suppose.

Dear Martin,

A CompactFlash card consists, internally, of a controller and memory chips.

The controller runs firmware. For the CompactFlash cards that I am familar with, the firmware can only be updated with very special equipment, usually by the factory.

Thus, while I do not have specific knowledge about Transcend's practices, I doubt that they could send you a firmware update to make their cards work with the Canon XF 305.

thanks Dan - wasn't sure. Just thought it very strange that although the card was capable of the read/write speed, it still couldn't handle the slow-mo. I take it that if I tried to shoot slow mo then it would just reject, or would it be prone to fail? (I don't have the camera as yet!)

Dear Martin,

I do not know what the XF 305 would do, in Slow and Quick mode, with a non-supported card.

I have not personally tested it.

But, I would expect it to fail.

Thanks for the update, Dan.

Please let us know when the new Axtremex 128GB CF cards (that support the Canon XF 300 & XF305) are available.

For your information, there is a firmware upgrade available for the XF100/XF105:

"Firmware Version 1.0.1.0 incorporates the following fix.

Support was added for slow-motion shooting with the following Lexar CF cards.
(1) Lexar Professional x600 16GB (LCF16GBCRBJP600)
(2) Lexar Professional x600 8GB (LCF8GBCRBJP600)
(3) Lexar Professional x300 16GB (LCF16GBCRBJP300)
(4) Lexar Professional x300 8GB (LCF8GBERBJP300)
(5) Lexar Professional x300 4GB (LCF4GBCRBJP300)"

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer/camcorders/flash_memory_camcorders/xf100#DriversAndSoftware

If you're using any of the above cards I guess it's worth upgrading. No mention of 32GB cards or the 400x though.

BR, Erik

You shouldn't, I have a Lexar 400x 32gb card, and it records the entire 79 mins without problems. I haven't tried slow-mo yet, and won't since I do it in post if I want slow-mo.

I have two identical Lexar 400x 32GB cards, one works fine, but the other stops every 5 minutes when the current file must be closed and a new opened. It works fine for recordings of less than 5 minutes ... sort of takes you back to the 35mm era where a reel would hold 4 minutes and you just had to plan for that...

I'm a bit puzzled as to this compatible or not discussion, the card is just a storage media that provides a specific read and write rate, and that's it. It works or it doesn't ... how can it work but not in slow? My only explanation is that it's a question of Canon certification procedure or policy... I just tried the 400x card and it does fine in 50p/25 slow .. well, didn't try more than 5 min.

Not that I would advocate the cheapest cards though, there may be differences in integrity checks or other issues that could result in lost footage.

BR, Erik

Wow, that is very interesting, and yet disappointing. I plan on buying for of the lexar 400x cards, maybe I will just go with 600x. Thanks for the warning!

I am also waiting for the Axtremex too, I wouldn't mind a 64gb card at the prices they are offering for.

Wow, that is very interesting, and yet disappointing. I plan on buying for of the lexar 400x cards, maybe I will just go with 600x. Thanks for the warning!The Lexar 400X cards are not on the Canon approved list why would you even consider buying them? The Sandisk Extreme cards are widely available & guaranteed to work in all circumstances so appear the obvious choice for purchase.

The Lexar 400X cards are not on the Canon approved list why would you even consider buying them? The Sandisk Extreme cards are widely available & guaranteed to work in all circumstances so appear the obvious choice for purchase.

The fact that some cards are certified and tested does not imply that other cards don't work. Certifying cards is just a way Canon can make money from companies like Lexar and SanDisk. These companies may then make a profit advertising their cards as certified and selling same at a premium price. But on the other hand, they have no interest in certifying each and every product, those who insist buying the certified product will be happy with one or two choices.

As I wrote before, the card is just a storage media, supporting a specified read/write speed. If the card meets the requirements of the camera the card should work without a glitch. Given that the 300x (and the 600x) is certified and the 400x is in the same product series I'd take compatibility for implied.

As long as Canon have not qualified what this CF card certification means and why some non-certified card may not work, as long as they say that certain recording modes won't work with certain cards that are otherwise compatible, without further explanation, I don't find that certification very credible. Then it seems you're just paying extra for essentially the same product and paying more for the same is usually not considered very rational.

On amazon.co.uk just to use an example, the 300x is 60% more expensive than the 400x, that's a huge difference for to almost identical products. You might just take the chance, should there be one "lemon" for every 2 "oranges" it's still cheaper.

Now, on amazon.de, the difference is just about 8%, but the 300x is still more expensive. With that difference, since I know that I won't get any benefit from the added speed, I might just take the 300x because it's on the list.

(At the current pricing, you should buy 400x in Amazon UK but 300x in Amazon DE)

BR, Erik

Certifying cards is just a way Canon can make money from companies like Lexar and SanDisk.If you don't have solid, objective evidence for a statement like this, don't say it. And even it would be true, it is definitely not the whole story...

As I wrote before, the card is just a storage media, supporting a specified read/write speed. If the card meets the requirements of the camera the card should work without a glitch. Given that the 300x (and the 600x) is certified and the 400x is in the same product series I'd take compatibility for implied.IMO, not good advice at all. As Dan nicely pointed out, card brands and models ARE internally different from each other. Manufacturers buy different binning (read: quality) of parts and run them with different firmware, oftentimes changing specs over time in the same line of product. You see people run into problems related to this with computer RAM all the time. Some cards just aren't as fast as others, some don't have quite the quality control as others, and some probably have firmware limitations that others don't have. "Assuming" on this point is a great way to burn yourself.

Canon will not benefit from their customers having recording issues due to CF cards so the certified list makes sense, but that does cost them time and money. Canon went to the expense of engineering a firmware update to add the high end Lexar cards. Why? It seems much more credible that the answer lies in some aspect of the cards they needed to address before they could certify them. Certainly not to screw their customers but to try to expand options while preventing problems for customers.

And they've promised a firmware upgrade for the 300/305 later this year to add features. Good on Canon! I don't know, but when they recover enough from this spring's earthquake and tsunami, it wouldn't surprise me if future firmware updates allow more high end cards onto the certified lists for both the 100 and 300 series. So will they certify some of these cheap cards you guys keep wanting to buy for this professional camera? I doubt it very much; I really don't see why they'd bother spending more money testing a whole bunch of low end cards. Or maybe they have tested some and they didn't make the cut...they're not going to diss those manufacturers by putting them on a public black list. They just don't get on the approved list.

I've stated my opinion on this issue before and it is rather harsh: do as you will; it is your money and your risk. But if you bought a professional camera costing thousands of dollars and then choose to cheap out and stray outside of the camera manufacturer's explicit recommendations...well, we love to quote movies here at DVinfo... "you've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?"

Me, I just budgeted a grand for 2 x 64GB Sandisk Extreme Pro cards to go with the camera when I bought it. That's my approach to feelin' lucky.

+1 what Pete said.

There is obviously an issue with CF cards on the XF cameras which isn't just a 50Mbps bit rate performance thing e.g. the 5DII has 40+Mbps video & you can use pretty much any CF card with no problems. Canon have gone to the trouble of thoroughly testing some brands presumably with the assistance of the vendors but I seriously doubt they are actually charging for the privilege. It's not in Canon's interest that their customers have problems with CF cards which is why the publish the list.

Erik, first say Given that the 300x (and the 600x) is certified and the 400x is in the same product series I'd take compatibility for implied. & then from your own experience prove that assertion is wrongI have two identical Lexar 400x 32GB cards, one works fine, but the other stops every 5 minutes when the current file must be closed and a new opened. Just buy the SanDisk Extreme already it's not like they are any more expensive than the Lexar cards that do not work reliably.

Dear Erik,

CompactFlash card manufacturers typically work hard to get their cards certified by Canon.

I know for a fact that Delkin and Axtremex have worked hard to do so.

It is in Canon's best interests, in my humble opinion, to get as many quality cards as possible certified.

To the best of my knowledge, Canon does not charge for a card to be certified.

Delkin and Canon were working very closely together to get the Delkin cards certified.

The tragedy in Japan has interrupted this certification process. In my opinon, this is completely understandable.

Many feel that CompactFlash cards are commodity items and interchangeable.

Actualy, each CompactFlash card has a Controller with Firmware, and the capabilities of a card vary widely by how the Firmware is programmed.

And of course, the speed of a card depends on the memory chips used and the design of the card internally.

I hope this helps.

FYI, Adorama and B&H both have Sandisk Extreme 16GB cards on sale for about $60 each if you buy two (as of this writing June 11 2011). That's not as cheap as some of the non-approved cards, but the Sandisk Extreme is on Canon's list of CF cards that work *at any speed* on the XF100 and XF300.

And the comments regarding CF card speed harken to days of arguing horsepower and other specs about cars. There's so much more to a car than pure horsepower. And for CF cards, the 'X' ratings (300X, 400X, etc.) are misleading, abstract and not very useful. Anybody who has written software or designed computer hardware knows that there are numerous factors that can lead to higher performance. And in this case, any glitch in recording can be disastrous if you're only recording to one card.

If you don't have solid, objective evidence for a statement like this, don't say it. And even it would be true, it is definitely not the whole story...

Certifying third party accessories is big business, of course not as big as selling the product, but you can be fairly certain that when one company recommends the product of another company, a deal has been struck, how much the deal is and who pays depends on who needs it the most. But assuming that some company do this for free is naïve.

IMO, not good advice at all. As Dan nicely pointed out, card brands and models ARE internally different from each other. Manufacturers buy different binning (read: quality) of parts and run them with different firmware, oftentimes changing specs over time in the same line of product.

Development is costly, and making significant changes to the hardware of largely similar series of products is not rational. To the contrary you often find products in different classes from the same manufacturer using same parts, to the extent that there are cases of advanced functions in the high end product simply being disabled in the firmware or buttons removed in the low end product.

Some cards just aren't as fast as others, some don't have quite the quality control as others, and some probably have firmware limitations that others don't have. "Assuming" on this point is a great way to burn yourself.

In this particular case, I'm comparing Lexar Profesional 32GB in the three versions 600x, 400x and 300x (btw, the 300x no longer appears on Lexar's product list). Both the 300x and 600x are certified by Canon, the 400x is not. Lexar has no interest in introducing an inferior product in their profesional line, they would be better off simply not producing the 400x. So, on this argument, and that above, I think there's good reason to assume the 400x should work well with the camera.

Next, what do you get extra picking form Canon's list? Does using cards on the list imply any liability of Canon or the manufacturer? I think not. You get nothing! Except the knowledge that somebody at Canon tried the card and found it compliant.

Is there a big risk in buying a non certified card? No, unlike batteries, it's not like they're gonna break the camera. The risk is that the card is useless or you may loose footage - just as with a certified card that might just be that lemon in the basket.

Will I buy the 400x again? Yes. Would I recommend it? Yes. At least in Europe. When you buy online, EU consumer rights give you the right to try the purchased product and return it within 7 or 14 days if it doesn't meet your expectations. So, you can actually try and test it and if you've found a lemon, return it, money back no questions asked.

So will they certify some of these cheap cards you guys keep wanting to buy for this professional camera? I doubt it very much; I really don't see why they'd bother spending more money testing a whole bunch of low end cards.

I don't think that this particular card is more low end than the other cards in the same series, if it were, Lexar would not have any interest in branding it with the high end products. I doubt that Canon spends money certifying cards but rather the card manufacturers pay Canon to do it. Will Lexar spend money certifying the 400x? Maybe not, if they can sell the more expensive cards instead or they have some newer cards coming up. Does it make a difference? No, if it works.

do as you will; it is your money and your risk.

Thanks! I didn't expect to ask your permission though :)

Me, I just budgeted a grand for 2 x 64GB Sandisk Extreme Pro cards to go with the camera when I bought it. That's my approach to feelin' lucky.

Good for you.

Depending on your needs and how deep your pocket is, buying certified cards or not is a rational choice with the risks implied. Which choice that comes out of the equation depends. Simply ranting against anything not certified by Canon is as naïve as blindly recommending whatever should be compliant according to the specs.

BR, Erik

Nigel, I would accept your argument if neither of my cards worked. But one works fine. Rather it appears I've got a lemon which could happen with certified cards as well.

Now, as you know in the EU if you report a product faulty within the first 6 months it is assumed a manufacturer error and the reseller has to prove otherwise to refuse repair or replacement under warranty. I've discovered this issue after just 3 months.

BR, Erik

Well, Erik, let me be even more blunt than I usually am:

If you have facts about Canon's certification process, share them or shut up about them. If you're wrong, it is libel. I haven't edited this thread so far but this needs to stop.

Development is costly, and making significant changes to the hardware of largely similar series of products is not rational.Sorry, as an absolute statement, simply wrong. It happens both ways depending on the company and product line: sometimes the same part is used throughout a line from bottom to top, sometimes even the same SKU made on different dates will have different components and/or firmware. VERY common in small electronics.

Is there a big risk in buying a non certified card? No...I say again, do you feel lucky? IF a person does his or her own careful and lengthy testing before going on a big shoot, it reduces the risk of surprises. Even so, the risk of a damaged or lost recording will be much greater with an uncertified card than with one that is certified. Look at this very thread -- there are examples right here of unpleasant surprises. If you're filming the family dogs wrestling in the back yard, oh well, who cares. If it is a first shoot for a big new client, you get what you deserve for taking a gamble you didn't have to take.

Simply ranting against anything not certified by Canon is as naïve as blindly recommending whatever should be compliant according to the specs.Neither of us is ranting, but you're making both unsupportable and wrong statements, and as well, we have different risk assessments and different solutions.

My advice remains the same: If you choose to use an uncertified card and have problems, don't come crying to us about it: http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xf-series-hd-camcorders/494245-any-card-over-60mb-s-overkill-correct.html#post1637523

I'm with Pete on this.....this thread is going in circles. Eric- you can have your opinion but you seem to want all of your fellow posters to declare that you are correct and ..........enough.

Jim Martin
FilmTools.com

Hey, I'm a newbie here, but from the sidelines, here's what I see.

If you are willing to take a risk, and your shoots don't represent much value, so ahead and experiment with random cards.

If, on the other hand, each day's shoot represents hundreds or thousands of dollars (as is the case for me), you may want to stick with the cards which Canon has certified. How that gets done doesn't matter to me.

I unboxed my XF105 yesterday, and am still waiting for the cards to come in. But, I did order Sandisk Extreme Pro. When I fly four or five people in for one day of video shooting, I'm not risking even one take on questionable cards.

Nigel, I would accept your argument if neither of my cards worked. But one works fine. Rather it appears I've got a lemon which could happen with certified cards as well.

Now, as you know in the EU if you report a product faulty within the first 6 months it is assumed a manufacturer error and the reseller has to prove otherwise to refuse repair or replacement under warranty. I've discovered this issue after just 3 months.

BR, ErikGood luck getting it replaced as neither Canon nor Lexar claim that the 400X card works with XF cameras. You may not have a lemon. You may have one card that is exceeding specifications (by actually working with XF) & the other card is working to specifications i.e. it doesn't work properly. Maybe the performance of Lexar's 400X product isn't consistent? Maybe Canon tested the 400X cards & found they didn't work? Who knows? Who cares? I just checked on Amazon & the certified Sandisk Extreme Compact Flash cards are cheaper than the 400X Lexar cards so it seems pointless to waste money on the Lexar 400X cards in the hope that they might work.