Subject: Re: Inca Trail and Battery Charging
Full headers:
X-Received: by with SMTP id z57mr5700509qta.33.1509728661138;
Fri, 03 Nov 2017 10:04:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: PeterN <"peter,newdelete">
Subject: Re: Inca Trail and Battery Charging
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2017 13:03:17 -0400
Organization: NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $23.95
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <>
References: <ot56kb$mmj$>
<011120170909176705%nospam@nospam.invalid> <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
In-Reply-To: <>
X-Received-Bytes: 3755
X-Received-Body-CRC: 2996405882
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Print Article
Forward Article
On 11/2/2017 10:28 PM, -hh wrote:
> PeterN wrote:
>> Depends on the camera, and file settings.
> But of course!
>> D800 shooting at 14bit uncompressed RAW is 74.4 MB.
>> D500 shooting at 14bit uncompressed RAW is 25.0 MB.
> The latter is close enough to my Canon's data consumption rate ... and
> the 192GB in CF cards which I paid only (yes, got lucky) $100 for affords
> over 5,000 exposures (in RAW+JPG).

You did indeed get lucky. Amazon sells the Lexar Professional 128 GB for 
$275. Yes I know there are cheaper cards, but I have used only the Lexar 
or Sandisk. I have read too many horror stories about other brands. I 
will go with the odds.

> For the D800, it gets a bit over 800 shots out of each 64GB card, and 192GB
> works out to roughly 2,500 shots.  That's 10 days @ 250/day...enough capacity yet?
Capacity sounds about right. When I shoot landscape I shoot at most 
about ten frames per hour, fifty if I am bracketing, (Since there is a 
lot of DR in the D800, 1 EV difference is not very meaningful, 
Therefore, I need five shots to get 2 EV difference.)  If I want to do 
panos, could be significantly more, depending on the scene.

>> Basic arithmetic will tell you that you cannot get thousands of images when
>> shooting at 14 bit uncompressed NEF.
> Sorry, but since it can be shot & stored, the number of GB for storage for 1,000 shots is simple
> And at ~$1/GB (retail), the estimated acquisition cost is quite straightforward too.

> This isn't a technology barrier - it's merely cost...and as I said, memory cars are profoundly
> today than even but just a few years ago.
> And frankly, when we dropping $2K for a body or $1K for a lens, why should spending
> +$100 for having a 1,000 magazine depth (or +$200 for 2K) be such an whinefest?

No argument from me, on that. my personal preferences are to use 32 GB 
cards, as that is usually enough for a days shooting. I figure that if I 
lose a card, I only lose that day.
Remember I have two cards in each of my cameras.