Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Sandisk 16gb 60MB/s for $115

Jonathon Laing said:
My point is, well how many CF cards do you get? How many is a lot?
Click to expand...

We test *every* card out on the market that is potentially fast enough and even more unreleased and prototype cards we can get (usually many months before they are on the market). We have relationships with practically every card reputable manufacturer out there to make sure we get the fastest biggest cards as soon they're available.
 
i just talked to a lexar rep the other day. the 8 gb cards, are rehoused lexar cards for red, that's why they work perfectly. lexar provides their 8 gb cards to red, and red just puts their label on it. biggest reason to stick with red on those cards is if something goes wrong with it, red will cover it. if u get it from lexar for cheaper and the card is defective, and ur not in warranty, too bad.

they claim their 600x cards are complete 90 mb SUSTAINED, of course any company will claim that, but they have a very solid rep, so IMHO i think they'll deliver. should be plenty fast, and at 32 gb too. as soon as they are in full production i'm sure everybody and their mothers will be testing it. the whole "red screwing us over with media" comment is a little premature. if their name is on it, and it's bad media, it's their fault, and customer service will take care of u, that's the whole point of them putting their name on it. it's been the same argument with P2 cards since they came out, those things are freakin rock solid, if u get a defective one, panansonic will replace it no problem even out of warranty and what not. everybody says, it's just raided SD cards in there it shouldn't be that expensive. they price it at that cuz A. they wanna make a profit B. they stand by their product whole heartily it's been one of the most solid tapeless mediums even till now. keep in mind companies like sandisk and so on are a bit consumer-ish and market to that. Lexar is a bit more professional grade, and have performed up to their claims much more than sandisk ever has.
 
Deanan,

I have been watching the new SDXC format card specs and see that these may be a potential recording medium if cards can get the data rates. With theoretical capacity limits of 2TB and speeds of up to 104 MB per second they could eventually be good candidates if people aren't too scared of the small form factor. Toshiba are just about to release a 64GB model with claimed specs of 60MB/s read and 35MB/s write. If the speeds hold true, whilst they may not support the higher bitrate REDcode formats, the recording times would be very useful, would love it if they worked out.

Are you guys looking into these new SDXC cards at all?

P.S. I imagine you could fit four of these into a hotswap module the same size as the planned CF module. Perhaps with an option to RAID them for higher bitrate recording?
 
Deanan said:
We test *every* card out on the market that is potentially fast enough and even more unreleased and prototype cards we can get (usually many months before they are on the market). We have relationships with practically every card reputable manufacturer out there to make sure we get the fastest biggest cards as soon they're available.
Click to expand...

Deanan,

Totally understand that you do not have the time to provide full review(s) for what has been tested, but a simple YES / NO against the following list would be a great help (clearly understanding the warrranty implications) :

  • Lexar CF 8GB 300X = YES (same behaviour RED CF 8GB, by all accounts)
  • Lexar CF 16GB 300X = NO (limited to 2K) ?
  • Lexar CF 32GB 300X = NO (limited to 2K) ?
  • Lexar CF 8GB 600X = NO (limited to 2k) ?
  • Lexar CF 16GB 600X = NO (limited to 2k) ?
  • Lexar CF 32GB 600X = NO (limited to 2k) ?

Regards,

David
 
David Nardini said:
Deanan,

Totally understand that you do not have the time to provide full review(s) for what has been tested, but a simple YES / NO against the following list would be a great help (clearly understanding the warrranty implications) :

  • Lexar CF 8GB 300X = YES (same behaviour RED CF 8GB, by all accounts)
  • Lexar CF 16GB 300X = NO (limited to 2K) ?
  • Lexar CF 32GB 300X = NO (limited to 2K) ?
  • Lexar CF 8GB 600X = NO (limited to 2k) ?
  • Lexar CF 16GB 600X = NO (limited to 2k) ?
  • Lexar CF 32GB 600X = NO (limited to 2k) ?

Regards,

David
Click to expand...

Without mentioning vendors (NDA requirements), I can say that we have not found other 8GB, 16GB or 32GB card that we've been able to qualify.

While it may seem like a card that is claimed to support XX MB/s, should work, the testing that we do covers alot more such as consistency, repeatability, realtime conditions, bit level reliability, firmware compatibility, and a host of other tests. Full testing takes a huge amount of time and means firmware revisions on both the CF and camera side to make things work. It's not as trivial as a speed rating on a card. I really wish it was because we also want more choices and bigger capacities, sooner.
 
Quentin_B said:
Deanan,



P.S. I imagine you could fit four of these into a hotswap module the same size as the planned CF module. Perhaps with an option to RAID them for higher bitrate recording?
Click to expand...

imagine the equivalent of an SRW-1 deck/ ginormous raid solution the size of a mobile phone in your back pocket

ooh, just imagine that

there isn't an emoticon to describe it.
 
Deanan said:
Without mentioning vendors (NDA requirements), I can say that we have not found other 8GB, 16GB or 32GB card that we've been able to qualify.

While it may seem like a card that is claimed to support XX MB/s, should work, the testing that we do covers alot more such as consistency, repeatability, realtime conditions, bit level reliability, firmware compatibility, and a host of other tests. Full testing takes a huge amount of time and means firmware revisions on both the CF and camera side to make things work. It's not as trivial as a speed rating on a card. I really wish it was because we also want more choices and bigger capacities, sooner.
Click to expand...

Is it more a matter of the cards not being fully compatible with existing RED CF module hardware/camera firmware, or is the sustained write speed of these measured 70+MBps cards truly not enough without additional buffering hardware? I guess I'm finding it difficult to believe the latter, though it does sound like you are saying that these cards can at times have minimum write speed that drops below the required ~36MBps, and that they do so more regularly than older 300x and RED branded media that is measured to acheive only around half the speed of these new cards on average.
 
I'm just confused because, for example, these benchmarks
http://www.dvnation.com/benchmarks-CF-CFAST-SDHC-Cards.html (look at the HD Tach diagrams for the 32GB cards at the bottom of the page that test read and write speeds over the whole media)
seem to imply that there is no such sustained write inconsistency in even these inexpensive fast CF cards. This is why I am tempted to feel that it is more likely RED's CF module and firmware that are preventing us from using these cards. That is a 32GB 533x card that goes for around $150... They have a 64GB card for <$300. I would just prefer RED be clear about what the issue is, as support for modern media like this would significantly improve our ability to use their camera in lighter, faster and more convenient configurations for less $$.
 
Yes, I read what Deanan posted, but it does seem RED's statements on the matter are generally quite vague and dont deal with any specific cards or any specific inconsistencies or any specific incompatibilities. I was just presenting more specific information on a particular card that I thought might prompt a more precise characterization of the issues they have found with CF cards in testing.

I appreciate that RED has to be vague, but i also have to ask. I'd be interested in further details on the matter if they are willing to go into provide it.
 
I've tested most of of these new CF cards myself for other applications, and to compare to RED's 16GB cards. They are very inconsistent. Those benchmarks at dvnation don's show the whole picture, or much of a picture at all.

The new CFAST cards look a lot more promising, however we don't have a CFAST module for the RED One... Yet. It has been mentioned in the past as a consideration and I think we have a better chance of seeing CFAST and 1.8" SSD options for media with the new cameras over CF. The days of CF are numbered and I wouldn't be surprised if the 16GB RED cards are the last they make for CF media. I suppose we could still see 32GB cards as they were supposedly in the works at one point, but CFAST is hitting the market now and posting much better numbers.
 
I admit i havent heard a lot about new CFAST cards, but I will be glad to see new SATA based options especially for already available SSDs. 80gb 1.8" SSDs from intel seem like a great option at 80gb for <$200 (for 1st gen). Especially with 250MBps offload speeds! Doesnt seem like that many other modern mainstream SSDs come in 1.8" form factor.
 
Jannard said:
Let me see... you want us to prove to you we aren't screwing you? I'm sure we have plenty of time for that.

Jim
Click to expand...

The people screwing you over are the much larger corporations stating untrue specs. Many 1080p cameras are not really 1080p Most plasmas stated as 2 000 000:1 contrast are lucky to actually display 1000:1. they're a bunch of liars, Red is telling the truth. But it's more fun to believe you could somehow get a $400 piece of tech for $80, if only they let you,and that your plasma has more contrast ratio than a real life narrow street in Greece at 3 PM.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top