Olympus EM-5 II memory card performance experiences?

[JonVdG]

I'm only shooting RAW stills and wondering if anyone has noticed any benefit from the current Sandisk Extreme Pro offering (max write speed of 90 MB/s) versus the Extreme (60 MB/s). I'm trying to determine if the EM-5 Mark II can take advantage of these faster speeds. Not just Sandisk, I'd like to hear about any other brand as well.

 

[Growltiger]

I'm only shooting RAW stills and wondering if anyone has noticed any benefit from the current Sandisk Extreme Pro offering (max write speed of 90 MB/s) versus the Extreme (60 MB/s). I'm trying to determine if the EM-5 Mark II can take advantage of these faster speeds. Not just Sandisk, I'd like to hear about any other brand as well.

The current SanDisk Extreme Pro is 300MB/s not 90MB/s. I use the 64GB model of it in the EM1 II. It supports UHS II.

But the EM5 II doesn't support UHS II, so that card would work fine but its higher cost would be wasted. The best card for the EM5 II is the same card I use in the original E-M1 and the Pen-F, the older SanDisk Extreme Pro 95MB/s. The fast speed means the buffer clears more quickly if you are taking lots of photos in a short time.

If you take single photos and not sequential or video then the older 45MB/s version will work fine.

EDITED - Sorry, E-M5 II does supprt UHS II.

 

[keith1200rs]

EM5.2 does support UHS II and the 300m versions are noticeably faster than the 90m (I use Sandisk)

 

[Mack]

At the risk of heresy, I find myself using my E-M1 Mark II more than the E-M1X. It could be I installed the faster 300 speed UHS-II cards in the older E-M1 Mark II, and have some lower-speed UHS-I cards in the E-M1X. The E-M1 Mark II seems to write to the cards faster then the E-M1X in a burst of shots.
Also, it might be the smaller size and weight of the E-M1 Mark II as well.

 

[AussiePhil]

At the risk of heresy, I find myself using my E-M1 Mark II more than the E-M1X. It could be I installed the faster 300 speed UHS-II cards in the older E-M1 Mark II, and have some lower-speed UHS-I cards in the E-M1X. The E-M1 Mark II seems to write to the cards faster then the E-M1X in a burst of shots.
Also, it might be the smaller size and weight of the E-M1 Mark II as well.

Take that man out and birch him for hours..... absolute heresy to install UHS1 cards in a 1X...... hang your head in shame...

 

[Tool Crazy]

I've seen this question asked before with the same answers however what many people don't realize or don't mention is that fast cards aren't just about clearing the buffer ASAP but they are also extremely useful on the computer side of things, things that value to me such as extremely fast read speeds and productivity. Uploading large amounts of data with a fast card can be the difference between waiting a few seconds or many minutes. Anyone handling video files, especially 4k, knows what I'm talking about.
Even if I was to use a camera that didn't take advantage of uhsii card speeds, I'd still use the fastest card I could afford so I spend as little time transferring files on the pc.

 

[wjiang]

I've seen this question asked before with the same answers however what many people don't realize or don't mention is that fast cards aren't just about clearing the buffer ASAP but they are also extremely useful on the computer side of things, things that value to me such as extremely fast read speeds and productivity. Uploading large amounts of data with a fast card can be the difference between waiting a few seconds or many minutes. Anyone handling video files, especially 4k, knows what I'm talking about.
Even if I was to use a camera that didn't take advantage of uhsii card speeds, I'd still use the fastest card I could afford so I spend as little time transferring files on the pc.

Indeed. I bought a UHS-II 300 MB/s card for my old E-M1 which only supported UHS-I just so I could import faster.

 

[Pyro451]

EM5.2 does support UHS II and the 300m versions are noticeably faster than the 90m (I use Sandisk)

+1

 

[Lupin 3rd]

I have used the Sandisk Extreme Pro 95 MB/s, V30, U3, (10) and the 'regular' Extreme in my E-M5 ii and GX8 and while the Pro is faster I haven't noticed a huge difference between the two.

 

[Thai-Mike]

Curently I am using ScanDisk Ultra 80 MB/s U1 10 64GB but I use as backup a ScanDisk Extreme Pro 95 MB/s U3 v30 10 32 Gb, just can't figure out a difference.

The ScanDisk Extreme Pro 95 MB/s U3 v30 10 32 GbI bought for recording 4k videos on my TG-5. This was the only card it recorded.

 

[wjiang]

Unless you're doing lots of high FPS sequential shooting or high bit rate video you're unlikely to notice much difference in camera once you get above UHS-I.

 

[MarkyM]

I have been very happy with my Transcend 64GB UHS II card. I bought it for my EM-5 II and now use it in my EM-1 II. It has proven to be both fast and reliable. (and less expensive than the Sandisk).

 

[Mack]

Take that man out and birch him for hours..... absolute heresy to install UHS1 cards in a 1X...... hang your head in shame...

LOL!!!

Yeah. I know I should put faster cards in the E-M1X than the slow 95 MB/s cards. The slow 95 MB/s ones were cheap and on sale at Best Buy so I couldn't resist and they don't carry the fast ones in store as few buy them given the price (Me too!). Plus, I got a lot of older ones lying around that the Nikons took in slot two.

That said, there really is a boost in camera speed using the 300 MB/s cards in either camera. The 95's seem to take hours in a burst for the SD card flashing LED or symbol to stop, but the 300's are pretty much finished when I put the camera down to review the shots from a burst.

Still, the old E-M1 Mark II seems to get used for being smaller or less weight than the E-M1X having both. Maybe why I use the M43 system more than the old Nikons which seem more like a 4x5 camera and heavy too. The Nikons are in roller bags too given their weight and size. Big PITA to deal with overall as they sink in wet grassy areas (Small skinny wheels.) and I have to lift and carry them at times which feels like a sack of concrete.

 

[AussiePhil]

LOL!!!

Yeah. I know I should put faster cards in the E-M1X than the slow 95 MB/s cards. The slow 95 MB/s ones were cheap and on sale at Best Buy so I couldn't resist and they don't carry the fast ones in store as few buy them given the price (Me too!). Plus, I got a lot of older ones lying around that the Nikons took in slot two.

That said, there really is a boost in camera speed using the 300 MB/s cards in either camera. The 95's seem to take hours in a burst for the SD card flashing LED or symbol to stop, but the 300's are pretty much finished when I put the camera down to review the shots from a burst.

Still, the old E-M1 Mark II seems to get used for being smaller or less weight than the E-M1X having both. Maybe why I use the M43 system more than the old Nikons which seem more like a 4x5 camera and heavy too. The Nikons are in roller bags too given their weight and size. Big PITA to deal with overall as they sink in wet grassy areas (Small skinny wheels.) and I have to lift and carry them at times which feels like a sack of concrete.

I'll shove this half back on topic ...... Whilst i get the pricing thing, slow cards are nearly a dime a dozen at the local corner store, intentionally crippling your camera performance seems so wrong.

The EM5.2 states UHS2 compatibility in the specs but a number of threads have claimed the camera doesn't have the extra pins in the card slot to take advantage of the higher speeds and as i don't own one i have no idea if that is true.

Regardless UHS2 cards offer benefits of read speeds when downloading in your computer or backing up to external storage so if the camera supports the faster UHS2 card then i'd still use the fastest i could buy.....