The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Are two card slots really important?

jdphoto

Well-known member
This question has been debated before with some suggesting no pro would shoot without two cards. I can understand the peace of mind it brings, but with the new Sony A7III's, I've read that the camera locks up if one card fails, so the camera is useless regardless of having two slots. I also think that CF cards are becoming more obsolete now with XQD and high capacity SD. Pins in camera for CF seem prone to damage too. I've been shooting with a Nikon D810 because I love the OVF, but have been thinking about my once owned Sony A7RII after going over a few ski photos. That camera was amazingly light with almost MFD quality and can now be purchased brand new for the price of an Fuji XT3. So, I'm curious about other experiences with CF, SD or XQD. There's considerable feedback from photographers in favor of two, so why did Nikon's Z leave them out when it's certain a new model will have two? Are two cards just marketing hype or camera makers known practice (Leica) of leaving out useful features only to be used in the next iteration of cameras?
 
Are two cards just marketing hype or camera makers known practice (Leica) of leaving out useful features only to be used in the next iteration of cameras?
If two card slots are better, are three card slots better yet? I mean you could lose everything if you had two bad cards.
 
Last edited:

pegelli

Well-known member
.... but with the new Sony A7III's, I've read that the camera locks up if one card fails, so the camera is useless regardless of having two slots.
I think two card slots (and writing all files to both cards) is an insurance against a card failure that is not noticed during shooting. So in case the camera with one cardslot stops functioning when its SD card is malfuntioning is not the bigest problem, just change camera or card and you're back in business.

Coming home in your studio and then finding a whole card of a wedding shoot with one card (or other expensive/critical job) is corrupted and not recoverable is the thing you want to avoid at all cost, for which the probability goes down when using two cards/two slots (but even with two cards/slots the probability of this happening is not zero).
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
If they bother to put in two slots, I would prefer if both of them were of equal high speed. If using the slow card slot in addition to the faster one, slows down the faster one, then I tend to only use the faster one, e.g. in the Sony A9.

That’s an issue for birding and fast sports action. But I don’t think wedding photographers would worry about that. In any case it pays during shooting to pay attention to card issues as well. So, to have two slots is better than 1, or 3 or 4... generally speaking, I assume, if shooting unique time-dependent events.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
A build in giga byte storage plus a card slot.

Now, that is even better! :clap:

(ANYTHING that will bring down the prices of an earlier generation camera is fine by me! :D)
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I have two cameras with twin card slots; the Olympus 7070 and the Fuji S3. They both feature one CF slot and one XD slot. They had two slots because they wanted to promote the now defunct XD card standard but understood that they wouldn't sell many cameras if they didn't include the more mainstream CF slot as well.

I've had one - 1 - card fail on me. It was easily corrected with some software that I downloaded from the internet. I don't remember when that was, but my Mac was running OS 9. I always carry at least two cameras plus backup cards. I also carry a pair of spare glasses. While i have needed the spare glasses on occasions, I've never needed a backup card except when I shot motor sports regularly and a card ran out of space.

I've had many cameras fail on me for different reasons. Card problems has so far not been one of them.
 

jdphoto

Well-known member
With more higher paying photography gigs, I just think that it's imperative to have two now. If I was just shooting landscapes off by myself, no big deal, but sometimes the extra card is peace of mind when shooting big jobs. I once shot a big wedding with a Sony A7RII and used a portable HD to dump photographs on every few hours. It was really slow and sometimes more aggravating because you had to wait to get to the studio with fingers crossed that there's something to edit.
 

bab

Active member
With more higher paying photography gigs, I just think that it's imperative to have two now. If I was just shooting landscapes off by myself, no big deal, but sometimes the extra card is peace of mind when shooting big jobs. I once shot a big wedding with a Sony A7RII and used a portable HD to dump photographs on every few hours. It was really slow and sometimes more aggravating because you had to wait to get to the studio with fingers crossed that there's something to edit.
If you have one slot you better have two bodies, if you came to shoot my wedding with one body and one slot I’d be nervous, if there was two photographers and four bodies I’d be calm and I think that goes for most people. That being said I don’t understand the debate! It’s pointless. The job requires back up period!
 

jdphoto

Well-known member
If you have one slot you better have two bodies, if you came to shoot my wedding with one body and one slot I’d be nervous, if there was two photographers and four bodies I’d be calm and I think that goes for most people. That being said I don’t understand the debate! It’s pointless. The job requires back up period!
You might have hard time convincing those who just purchased the new flagship mirrorless cameras from Nikon and Canon that only have one slot.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
If you have one slot you better have two bodies, if you came to shoot my wedding with one body and one slot I’d be nervous, if there was two photographers and four bodies I’d be calm and I think that goes for most people. That being said I don’t understand the debate! It’s pointless. The job requires back up period!
Arriving at any paid job with less than two bodies is unprofessional, period. Any camera can fail and will do so at the most inconvenient moment. When I was shooting professionally, I was carrying two bodies and had a spare in the car.

In my experience, the chances that a camera body will fail is much bigger than that a card or a card slot will fail. Am I repeating myself? Possibly, and for good reason.
 

bab

Active member
Arriving at any paid job with less than two bodies is unprofessional, period. Any camera can fail and will do so at the most inconvenient moment. When I was shooting professionally, I was carrying two bodies and had a spare in the car.

In my experience, the chances that a camera body will fail is much bigger than that a card or a card slot will fail. Am I repeating myself? Possibly, and for good reason.
Yes but my worst failure was on a trip to the central artic back in the 90s I had the fits digital Canon and a Hasselblad w/ 110mm. The lens turned once to a focus position and froze. You couldn’t turn it left or right! That’s been the only issue I’ve ever had with total failure in 50 years.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
As others have said, I never went to a paid shoot without a second, identical backup camera body that was tested and known good.

Regards two card slots, I've had a couple of cameras that had two card slots but never found any need at all for them. In fact, I found in most cases that they simply complicated my post-shoot workflow.

In the seventeen years of making hundreds of thousands of photos with digital cameras since my photography went primarily digital capture, I've never once had a card failure or a camera failure, or even a lens failure when on a shoot.

G
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
This topic was beat to death when Nikon and Canon introduced their new mirrorless cameras . A lot depends on what and how you are shooting .

If you are a wedding photographer or any situation where you could not repeat the shoot..then yes you would want dual cards and should be recording raw captures to both . No other approach provides the same level of security .

HOWEVER .....for most photography it is an over rated feature . Because :

1. The new XQD cards and even some of the “tough” SD cards are far more reliable than our experiences of only a few years ago.

2. Using two cards often slows the camera to the slowest cards speed . You can get around this by shooting raw to the fast card and jpeg to the slower card .

3. Up to 170K in my LR catalog and have never lost a single image due to card failure . I have had cards go bad and have to use recovery software to get the files ...but I always retrieved them . LEXAR CF cards have been the worst and its almost always a situation where the camera is trying to write files faster than the card (Nikon D4S) ..its called an incomplete write and it screws up the folder . I have had a few LEXAR SD cards go bad but never had to recovery files . This was almost always do to mishandling them (when you see a dent in the card you know OPS ...I did it .)

Pretty much everything I shoot can t be easily repeated (mostly Street Shooting and Family ). I use two identical bodies for every important shoot and select lenses than could be overlapped . My standard operating procedure would be to (1) reformat the SD cards with SD Formatter ..then format again in the camera . (2) download all files daily to my MBP and back up (3) start every shoot with a fully charged battery .

This process allows me to catch any issues as early as possible . Most issues are self inflicted technique blunders . Low battery is a problem waiting to happen .

If I was still shooting weddings ..I would be using two shooters ,each with two bodies and each body with two card slots .

There is a debate on using cards as backup and not switching out a working card . Since cards normally fault due to handling issues ...when you have a reliable card ..maybe you should keep using it . If you have the capacity ...most cameras will start a new folder after you have downloaded your files . So day one would be a folder and day two a new folder . I haven t done this but it seems to have merit .

Final thought ....I shoot primarily (80%) with two M10 bodies each with one slot and never a problem ..ever .
 

jdphoto

Well-known member
Many use a card reader, so handling is a must unless your camera is connected to a computer. For me, that's not always convenient. It's not just weddings that require b/u. it's anything that you value as a photographer. For me, it could be changing light, an expression or simply a flick of the hair during a portrait shoot. I've done shoots with professional skiers going down 60 degree pitches in two feet of snow. I did one showcasing a skier against a panorama for a popular Winter clothing company. I can't switch cameras very easily in those situations if an SD card is corrupt. Nor do I want to carry the extra weight. Does Nikon, Canon or Leica assume a professional will just buy two identical cameras because of only one card slot? I hope not, especially with Leica! The popular method of holding SD cards in place for most cameras is the spring loaded "push to click in/push to remove." The spring in the camera can sometimes be the cause of not reading properly and not the SD card at all, so what then? If one is just starting out as a photography business, sometimes only one camera is the only option considering lenses, lights and expendables. So, for me, any camera with only one slot is not a professional tool. (yes, I love the Sony A7RII, but won't buy the A7RIII) but there's no good reason to leave them out. Yeah, I'm taking to you Nikon and Canon! Shooting film requires much less investment for b/u too. Digital has mucked all this up:) I also don't care how "tough" XQD or SD cards are either. So, I guess I answered my own question. Yes, two card slots are important because it's better to have it and not need it, then to need it and not have it.
 
As a matter of historical interest, what was the first digital camera to have two card slots, and how did professionals cope before its introduction?
 
Last edited:

Godfrey

Well-known member
Many use a card reader, so handling is a must unless your camera is connected to a computer. For me, that's not always convenient. It's not just weddings that require b/u. it's anything that you value as a photographer. For me, it could be changing light, an expression or simply a flick of the hair during a portrait shoot. I've done shoots with professional skiers going down 60 degree pitches in two feet of snow. I did one showcasing a skier against a panorama for a popular Winter clothing company. I can't switch cameras very easily in those situations if an SD card is corrupt. Nor do I want to carry the extra weight. Does Nikon, Canon or Leica assume a professional will just buy two identical cameras because of only one card slot? I hope not, especially with Leica! The popular method of holding SD cards in place for most cameras is the spring loaded "push to click in/push to remove." The spring in the camera can sometimes be the cause of not reading properly and not the SD card at all, so what then? If one is just starting out as a photography business, sometimes only one camera is the only option considering lenses, lights and expendables. So, for me, any camera with only one slot is not a professional tool. (yes, I love the Sony A7RII, but won't buy the A7RIII) but there's no good reason to leave them out. Yeah, I'm taking to you Nikon and Canon! Shooting film requires much less investment for b/u too. Digital has mucked all this up:) I also don't care how "tough" XQD or SD cards are either. So, I guess I answered my own question. Yes, two card slots are important because it's better to have it and not need it, then to need it and not have it.
(bolded) For sure, because there is no way at all to back up film exposures. It's much less expensive to consider back up when there are exactly no options whatever. I've had orders of magnitude more issues with film camera malfunctions than with any digital capture equipment.

Seems to me that you had already decided what was important to you before you asked the question. So what was the point of asking the question?

G
 
Top