From: Bill W <>
Subject: Re: Cheap SD Cards
Full headers:
From: Bill W <>
Subject: Re: Cheap SD Cards
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2017 20:26:14 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 65
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info:; posting-host="c7d6be2bef202cfacd30e5b4b770a422";
logging-data="16084"; mail-complaints-to="";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18/K8dghy2jy9bMJ6HdZrKtetsYnUgRPAY="
User-Agent: ForteAgent/
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: AVG (VPS 171118-2, 11/18/2017), Outbound message
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mVnn5S2ppI3jokqBGv59XnERnjQ=
Print Article
Forward Article
On Sat, 18 Nov 2017 21:14:26 -0500, PeterN
<"peter,newdelete"> wrote:

>On 11/18/2017 8:48 PM, Bill W wrote:
>> On Sat, 18 Nov 2017 16:31:39 -0800, Savageduck
>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}> wrote:
>>> On Nov 18, 2017, Eric Stevens wrote
>>> (in article<>):
>>>> On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 10:57:11 +1300, Eric Stevens
>>>><>  wrote:
>>> <<Snip>>
>>>>> Does this throw any light on the card requirements?
>>>> Is a UHS-II card a "Type II card" which the manual says "cannot be
>>>> used"?
>>> Yup!
>> I don't think so. UHS cards are much faster than earlier cards with
>> "Class" ratings. And "Type 2" refers only to CF cards.
>>> So now we know, the problem was, Peter was using a card which the D800
>>> couldn't support. This time he actually had too much card for the camera.
>>> There is nothing wrong with the card, and he should be able to use it in his
>>> D500. That will handle UHS-II cards.
>> UHS2 is backwards compatible with UHS1, but there can be issues in
>> card readers that aren't set up for 2, just like Peter was told. I
>> still wouldn't be surprised if the problem arose from multiple
>> exposures, and some possibility that the backward compatibility
>> induced problems. There are more contacts on UHS2 cards, and contact
>> placement in the camera might be an issue. If I were Peter, I might
>> stick with UHS1.
>For reasons previously stated, multiple exposure had nothing to do with 
>the issue.
>I certainly intend to stick with UHS1 on the D800.

I'm still not so sure. The possible fact that some multiple exposures
were fine means nothing at all. But if all single exposures were good,
and all the bad files just happened to be multiple exposures, that
might be the problem. At the same time, if you copied the files to
disk before opening them, and then they all opened fine in some
software (which your original post seemed to indicate), or if you were
opening them directly from the card reader, Delkin might be right that
there is a problem with your card reader. Did you get and try the new
reader yet? I would certainly hang onto that card until you test it
again. They are good cards from what I can see. 

Anyway, whenever I have a strange result like you got, the first thing
I do is go over what I did differently. The first is multiple
exposures, and second is plugging a UHS2 card into a UHS1 socket. Even
though there should be no problems with either, they are what I would
blame first, and blame the card itself last.