EM-1 Mk II memory card price / performance

MikeWhitten

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Dec 29, 2012
Messages
75
Not to beat a topic to death but in case someone else like me is revising a kit after getting an EM1.2 I thought I'd put this here as well as on that other site for folks that don't follow both. Hope that's ok.

With the EM1.2 UHS-II cards are far from equal performers. In the past I always bought SanDisk thinking that while they may not be the cheapest they'd always perform well. Not so much in this case. From Olympus E-M1 II SD Card Speed Comparison Test - Fastest UHS-II and UHS-I Memory Cards by Write Speed and Continuous Shooting Results in the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II - Camera Memory Speed Comparison & Performance tests for SD and CF cards:

Lexar Pro 2000x UHS-II 32GB - 163.4MB/s - $55
Transcend Ultimate UHS-II - 32GB - 140.2MB/s - $45
SanDisk Extreme Pro UHS-II 32GB - 99.6MB/s - $60
Lexar Pro 1000x UHS-II 32GB - 77.3MB/s - $22

So my usually favorite brand seems sandwiched in an unattractive price/performance trap.

PS - Data's good for EM1.2 only as of this posting date. Not saying this applies to other cameras and I suppose a future firmware update from either Olympus or SanDisk may change things but I personally won't count on it.
 
Last edited:

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,990
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
I bought a SanDisk card. I've never used Lexar cards before, just because I've come across more threads online where people have run in to corruption issues with Lexar cards, and they were identified in some of the earlier confusion around the E-M1 II SD card issues. I've never had an issue with ANY of my SanDisk cards, so I ponied up $120 to get a 64GB card that I'm using in slot 1 for photos (I'm using a 128GB UHS-I SanDisk card in slot 2 for video capture).

I would have purchased a 64GB Transcend card had they been available, but they weren't at the time I bought my E-M1 II so I went with SanDisk.
 

hoodlum

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
567
Location
Toronto Canada
I'd consider the Lexar 2000x as the value leader since it comes with a UHS-II card reader. This was a must have for me. The other cards require you to purchase the reader separately.
 

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,990
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
I'd consider the Lexar 2000x as the value leader since it comes with a UHS-II card reader. This was a must have for me. The other cards require you to purchase the reader separately.
What's the purpose of the card reader? I simply plug my UHS-II SD card in to my Macbook Pro, and it works fine.
 

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,990
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
You Macbook Pro likely maxes out at 90mbps. So it would take 3 times longer to upload the files.

It's never been an issue for me before to import my images in to Lightroom. I spend FAR more time editing the images, so that marginal time it takes to import the images off of the SD card is an extremely small percentage of time compared to that of editing the images.

But I guess if you shoot JPEG and need to get the files off of your card as quickly as possible, it would be an advantage.
 

AussiePhil

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 1, 2014
Messages
2,935
Location
Canberra, ACT, Aust
Real Name
Phil
my lexar 2000x 32Gb card has been generally great. Had one evening last week where it seemed not to be recognised and all images went to slot2 and I really didn't notice till late and I just thought I'd overflowed. When I pulled the card from slot2 the camera wrote to one so writing it off as a glitch.
Now to save money for a 64 or preferable a 128Gb lexar 2000x. :) the 64s start north of 200 in Australia
 

dornblaser

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 13, 2012
Messages
3,415
Location
Chicago-area
Real Name
David Dornblaser
Nope. Standard UHS-I cards are sufficient even for the 237 Mbps C4K on the E-M1 II. The UHS-II card is needed to deal with features like ProCapture and 60fps full resolution RAW images.

Not if you are downloading many GB's of 4K video, which will grow when 10 bit comes to the GH5.
 

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,990
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
I tend to use Scandisk cards now after having a few problems with cheaper cards. For me reliability is far more important than speed, to an extent.
Agreed. It's kind of like hyper cars. Sure, one may do 0-60 in 2.7 seconds, while another will do it in 2.9 seconds. But at the end of the day, both are ridiculously quick and get the job done.

Spending an extra $20 on an SD card over the course of its life (let's say 2-3 years) is pretty insignificant.
 

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,990
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
Not if you are downloading many GB's of 4K video, which will grow when 10 bit comes to the GH5.

Why are you talking about the GH5's video in a thread that was created talking about the E-M1 II?

And even with the GH5, the 10-bit 4K mode shoots at 150 Mbps, which still records just fine on to UHS-I U3 cards. It's not you exceed 240 Mbps / 30 MBps where recording on to a UHS-I U3 card becomes uncertain. Below that, a UHS-I U3 is rated for the necessary data transfer rates.
 

dornblaser

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 13, 2012
Messages
3,415
Location
Chicago-area
Real Name
David Dornblaser
It is my understanding that it will record at 400 MBps when the final firmware updates are out and that one of the reasons that camera was delayed was for the cards to catch up.

You are right, it is an E-M1 II thread, and will bow out. My comments were meant generally and meant to be helpful. My point about downloading still stands, it is different point than internal recording.
 

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,990
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
It is my understanding that it will record at 400 MBps when the final firmware updates are out and that one of the reasons that camera was delayed was for the cards to catch up.

You are right, it is an E-M1 II thread, and will bow out. My comments were meant generally and meant to be helpful. My point about downloading still stands, it is different point than internal recording.

You are correct, that with future firmware updates the highest bitrate will be increased. However, a user could still select to use the 150 Mbps and therefore continue to use UHS-I U3 cards, getting 10bit 4K30 or 8bit 4K60 video.

One the E-M1, UHS-I U3 cards will handle C4K video just fine. I'm running a 128GB Sandisk Extreme UHS-I U3 card in slot 2 to record video to, and have yet to have it gives me any issues.
 

dornblaser

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 13, 2012
Messages
3,415
Location
Chicago-area
Real Name
David Dornblaser
Yes, we are on the same page. I am looking to future proof and record at max which is not something everyone will be doing. Obviously you know this, you can't add data in post. Like shooting in RAW, capturing every detail in video gives you the option to use that detail now, in the future, or not at all.
 

masayoshi

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Dec 5, 2016
Messages
930
Location
Salt Lake City
Real Name
Masaaki
Copying large 4K videos in UHS-II card to computer takes some time. It's much nicer to have UHS-II card reader. For still images, difference in transfer time is not so significant.
 

Latest threads

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom