sony sxs 64gb cards

[Jim Stamos]

i can get a 64gb card for 960 vs 2 32s for 1147 each.
are there any issues with the 64 since its obviously alot less to go that route

[Kevin Marco]

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-xdc...-sxs-card.html

[Jim Stamos]

you just answered my question, thanks. not touching that

[Philip Howells]

Since I was involved in that first thread I should add that I think my problems were procedural. They may also have been to do with the version of the browser. Since that occasion we have had absolutely no problems with 64Gb cards and wouldn't be without them.

We use three EX1Rs and although each camera obviously has a 32Gb in the second slot in case of over-run, even our longest wedding hasn't pushed us on to the second card. We rename the clip names in each camera so multicam identification is simple too.

[Jim Stamos]

im surprised more dont buy this, since its a big savings over 2 32s. i already have 2 16s for my r and i shoot weddings. i do have till sept to decide before my next one

[Bill Ward]

Most of the folks who have shied away from the 64 gig card go with the "don't put all yer eggs in one basket" argument, in my experience.

Price wise, seems a no-brainer to go 64 to me.

[Philip Howells]

Bill, I'm not a technician and don't know how the card is actually made but I can't think of one reason why a fault is more likely to develop in a 64Gb card than in a 32Gb card. Do the same people choose more smaller batteries or the larger ones?

[Bill Ward]

Phillip: that has largely been my reaction as well, when folks say "which would you rather lose---one hour of video or 4 hours?" To me, the cost per gig of card is certainly a big factor.

However; that is a good question. In the SxS world, is there any quality/reliability difference between a 32 gig Sony Pro card, and the 64 gig 1A 5-year card?

[Philip Howells]

Bill, my understanding is that the PRO cards were made under some sort of an agreement with Sandisk but the second generation -1 cards are Sony's own, and this was the main reason for the price differential hence the reduction in price per Gb.

When I was looking into an earlier move from Z1 to EX1 I asked a Sony engineer on a stand at BVE in London what the pros and cons were. His view was that in the case of corruption I'd lose less with an SxS card but could lose up to 17mins of a CF card in an MRC-1. "Mind you," he said, "if you really want to worry about problems of this sort of magnitude (ie very low risk) don't even think about a hard disk system".

I you discount the instances of problems caused (as mine were, to be honest) by sloppy workflow and confusion about the right browser to use I think you'll find the reports of genuine, hardware-related loss of recordings are very very low. Just as someone picked up my uncorrected earlier comment, we only report failures. It's like an old UK ad for Honda "My Honda, it keeps on going right" - you just don't hear it.

[Barry J. Anwender]

There is a reason for the cheaper price between the Pro and !GA versions of Sony's SxS cards. The devil is in the details. the B&H store clearly points out the difference:

"Offering the same performance and reliability as more expensive SxS Pro cards, the SxS-1 has about one-tenth the lifespan (about 5 years with heavy use). These entry-level cards are ultra fast, durable, and can record up to 3 hours of HD video."

So while the transfer speed of "entry-level" 1.2Gbps, 1GA card is better than the Pro card with 800 mps, the former has 1/10 the lifespan. Buyer be ware!

[Philip Howells]

Barry, your information is interesting and gives a better explanation re the cost differentials than my previous guess regarding licencing costs. However, on the basis of your information it's likely that the PRO cards will long outlive the cameras - given the rate of change we see in the industry today.

Equally, you'll understand that from my late-60's viewpoint, with usage which certainly can't be described as heavy, the notion of paying more for slower cards is already unappealing - add in the fact that they might last me 50 years is, dare I say it, irrelevant.

[Mike Marriage]

In regards the lifespan of the SXS-1 cards, it doesn't concern me at all. Even if there is any truth in it, in 5 years the cards will almost certainly be far cheaper to replace than the price difference between SXS and SXS-1 is now.

Maybe I'm cynical but it strikes me as more of a marketing ploy to justify suddenly having to halve the cost of SXS media in response to Panasonic releasing cheaper P2 cards.

[Les Wilson]

Originally Posted by Philip Howells

Bill, I'm not a technician and don't know how the card is actually made but I can't think of one reason why a fault is more likely to develop in a 64Gb card than in a 32Gb card. Do the same people choose more smaller batteries or the larger ones?

Batteries don't have data so that doesn't make any sense to me. It isn't the issue of a fault but the potential for loss/damage of a card in the field from human error in managing the card and wrangling the data off of it. There's tradoffs of the fewer cards the easier wrangling is but the greater the loss when there is an error. You pick the risk granularity you are comfortable with. At least that's how it was presented by Shane Hurlbut ASC in B&H's series on DSLRs.

[Philip Howells]

Les, we obviously do different work. I shoot mainly weddings now and use three EX1Rs. Each has a 64Gb card and a 32Gb. We rarely, if ever, use the second card. If the reason for preferring more smaller cards isn't because of potential faults on the card (which I assumed was the case) but the physical handling of the card, our method reduces that to nil in the field.

I can't relate to DSLRs because I don't and wouldn't use one.

[Les Wilson]

It has nothing to do with DSLRs. It has to do with wrangling cards not the probability of a fault.