Transcend32GB CompactFlash 800 Memory Card, Up to 120/60 MB/s, Supports High-Speed Ultra DMA Transfer Mode 7, Ideal for Ultra-High Resolution Full HD and 3D Video Recording TS32GCF800

I BOUGHT TWO TRANSCEND MEMORY CARDS FOR MY BOSS 900CD RECORDERS, BOTH OF WHICH HAD CEASED TO WORK. I SAVED £30 BY BUYING THESE INSTEAD OF BOSS " OWN BRAND . " UPON INSERTING THEM INTO THE RECORDERS, BOTH OF THEM BEGAN TO OPERATE CORRECTLY. THIS HAS SAVED ME A FURTHER £300 APPROX IN S/H REPLACEMENT COSTS/ "JUNKING " ONE FOR SPARES ! ABSOLUTELY DELIGHTED WITH THESE PURCHASES !

I just got a Canon 1DX II and it records 4K video in a good image quality but horrendously inefficient motion jpg codec. i have a 128Gb CFast which was extremely expensive and is necessary for 2160/50p using this camera so ideally i wanted a higher capacity CF to capture a decent amount of lower 25p framerate 4K - so the Cfast can be reserved for 50p duties. Of all my existing CF cards though only 1000x Lexar Professional was fast enough to record 2160/25p - and at 32Gb only eight minutes worth. This 800x CF in the 256Gb looked to be extremely good value and having received it today appears to indeed be fast enough to maintain reliable 2160/25p video on the 1DX II. Obviously more complex scenes need more data but higher ISO also increases noise and encoding complexity: in early test at iso 12,800 the CF kept up fine so i am sure it will prove to be okay. The data requirement for a 3 min 6 sec clip was 11.4 Gb which is a write speed of 61.3Mb/s and should give me 64 mins of 25p recording (+ my 128Gb Cfast giving me 8 mins 50p).I don't expect it to be as fast as my lexar 1000x for recording bursts of raw stills but will be trying it in a Canon 5D3 at a wedding i'm shooting stills at tomorrow and should it perform less than reasonably fast that i expect from it I will update this review.

I bought this card to use in my Canon EOS 50D and it has worked perfectly so far with no problems at all.It is fast enough to take a burst of shots on the jpeg + Raw setting @ 6.3 frames per second with no loss of speed that I could detect, even on longer bursts.Read speed is also fast as it only takes a short time to download a large number of jpeg + raw files direct from the camera onto the PC via the camera`s own usb cable, with no read/write errors so far. (It may be faster still with a card reader)I have been using the 16gb version of this card on my other camera body (EOS 40d) and I was so impressed with the cards performance that I bought this 32gb for the higher resolution EOS 50D. and this card does not disappoint either.With the camera set on jpeg and raw image recording, both on the highest resolution possible, (15mp) you can still get over a thousand images on this card, thats about 4,000+ high quality 15mp jpegs on one card, and on a 10mp camera about 50% more than that. (although this does vary depending on the type of pictures you are taking, as some pictures contain more information than others and have a larger file size.)Please remember that not all camera`s, (especially older models) are compatible with high capacity CF cards, check your camera for compatibility before buying this card to avoid any disappointment.All in all this is an excellent card that does everything the manufacturers claim, and it does it well.At this price it is highly recommended.

I'm surprised this didn't work in my Nikon as I checked that the camera could handle it. It couldn't and threw up an error. Good that Amazon did not charge me for it but I have to throw it away and will look for an alternative. I will ask a friend who has an identical camera. What a waste. It could of course be a one off that was faulty. Thank goodness I bought it from Amazon!

133x should be achieve a maximum transfer rate of about 21 MB/s. This card can't. In fact you can't even *read* data at anything like that speed, let alone write it.Real world measurements:Read test, performed 3 times: # for i in 1 2 3; do hdparm -tT /dev/sdc1; doneThe second figure in each case is the significant one. The first figure only refers to the buffer while the second is the real world read performance./dev/sdc1: Timing cached reads: 1680 MB in 2.00 seconds = 840.23 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 54 MB in 3.03 seconds = 17.82 MB/sec/dev/sdc1: Timing cached reads: 1632 MB in 2.00 seconds = 815.62 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 54 MB in 3.03 seconds = 17.83 MB/sec/dev/sdc1: Timing cached reads: 1706 MB in 2.00 seconds = 852.97 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 54 MB in 3.03 seconds = 17.84 MB/secSo less than 18 MB/s...a little disappointing.I then performed a write test twice and each run was identical. The test is simple; write a 4GB file and print the time taken and rate of transfer:# dd if=/dev/zero of=/media/disk/output.img bs=8k count=512k4294967295 bytes (4.3 GB) copied, 330.627 s, 13.0 MB/s13 MB/s is just about OK but not more than that, while the read speed of about 18 MB/s is also much poorer than I expected.I think the card is OK. In compatible equipment it seems fine. But that word 'compatible' is crucial, and also the card cannot perform anywhere near the claimed speeds. In my DSLR, an old Konica Minolta Dynax 7D, it works fine and easily outperforms unbranded generic cards and an old Kingston Elite Pro. In my compact, a Canon Powershot S70, it's not useable as it causes the camera to brainfart and results in corrupted files and I'm forced to power off and start again. In theory there is no limit on the size of CF card the camera can use and of course I format the card in the camera. I've also found that my PC's built in card reader doesn't always recognise the card (it's a modern enough reader, for example it reliably handles micro SDHC at full speed). So while the card works well enough in my DSLR it's quite annoying that it doesn't work well with another camera and a card reader. I wouldn't buy the same card or brand again, even though it's cheap.