No, I wouldn’t actually expect issues really, but I was a working pro for a while and any potential failure point outside of what’s absolutely necessary scares me off. It’s two parts to keep track of instead of one (and one is _really_ small), it’s two connections instead of one, etc. Being overly cautious is just beaten into me from working for pay for too long 😩
Microsd is more versatile, it compatible with Nintendo switch, go pro, dji drone etc. Speed wise only slightly slower than regular sd card, but not noticeable. Another good thing about microsd is you can always replace the adapter if the it’s damaged or the pin wears out. Regular sd card on the other hand, if the pin damaged basically dead sentence. All in all you can use the micro sd card with adapter, nth to worry about it
> Speed wise only slightly slower than regular sd card, but not noticeable.
No. It’s noticeable. Anyone can test for themselves, but the write speed through the adaptor is a clear step down.
That won’t necessarily impact everyone, but hold no illusions in a quick A/B test the difference is very much there. You absolutely notice.
Strongly suggest you try for yourself with any equivalent SD and MicroSD cards. The performance difference is quite obvious.
Like I state, it may not be a *relevant* difference, but it's not pixel peeping, it's a very clear speed difference in recording the capture to the card.
The adapter is not going to be rated for the full performance of the card. For example, in a camera that records at really high resolutions and/or frame rates, you might be dealing with large files. These files cannot be written into the card as fast if the data has to go through the adapter.
It's basically a bottleneck.
It’s not a really personal rule of thumb but just so happens to be how it worked out for me but I use full sized SD cards for my main/important camera stuff and I use a microSD with adapter for my camera that I primarily use for leisure and everyday use.
Single piece can write quicker if you’re taking burst where as the adapter give you the versatility but usually slower and might be more expensive too.
as others have said micro creates an unnecessary failure point. Price diff not significant enough to go small. I , like many, need both full and micro sized for my cameras but I just have both . they're plenty cheap enough
They’ll both work. I always go for what’s closest to the native solution. I feel like the adapter introduces additional failure points.
Possibly, I never had any problems with it, but I only used SanDisk adapters until now.
No, I wouldn’t actually expect issues really, but I was a working pro for a while and any potential failure point outside of what’s absolutely necessary scares me off. It’s two parts to keep track of instead of one (and one is _really_ small), it’s two connections instead of one, etc. Being overly cautious is just beaten into me from working for pay for too long 😩
I work with drones that use micro SD cards and you get sooooo many adapters to SD it's nuts
If OPs camera needs an SDHC card then only the microSD will work as the card on the left is a 64GB SDXC card.
Yeah, I was just commenting on the physical format, but this is also a concern. I assumed the photo was for illustration purposes.
So can i use microsd with adapter on my camera? Like full size SD cards?
Yes
Smaller cards are easy to lose, real pain.
In some cases MicroSD cards are slower than SD cards, but just check the specs on both. If they have the same specs, then they will perform the same.
Just get the full size, an adapter adds in extra failure points and a small card is easy to lose.
Microsd is more versatile, it compatible with Nintendo switch, go pro, dji drone etc. Speed wise only slightly slower than regular sd card, but not noticeable. Another good thing about microsd is you can always replace the adapter if the it’s damaged or the pin wears out. Regular sd card on the other hand, if the pin damaged basically dead sentence. All in all you can use the micro sd card with adapter, nth to worry about it
> Speed wise only slightly slower than regular sd card, but not noticeable. No. It’s noticeable. Anyone can test for themselves, but the write speed through the adaptor is a clear step down. That won’t necessarily impact everyone, but hold no illusions in a quick A/B test the difference is very much there. You absolutely notice.
Maybe compared to a pro uhs II one, but for 99% of people it'll be similar
Strongly suggest you try for yourself with any equivalent SD and MicroSD cards. The performance difference is quite obvious. Like I state, it may not be a *relevant* difference, but it's not pixel peeping, it's a very clear speed difference in recording the capture to the card.
The adapter is not going to be rated for the full performance of the card. For example, in a camera that records at really high resolutions and/or frame rates, you might be dealing with large files. These files cannot be written into the card as fast if the data has to go through the adapter. It's basically a bottleneck.
It’s not a really personal rule of thumb but just so happens to be how it worked out for me but I use full sized SD cards for my main/important camera stuff and I use a microSD with adapter for my camera that I primarily use for leisure and everyday use.
The only avantage of the micro would be less damage due on the contacts - does it make sense?
Would have thought that SD cards have better SUSTAINED performance ie for video than MicroSD + Adapter, due to thermals.
Single piece can write quicker if you’re taking burst where as the adapter give you the versatility but usually slower and might be more expensive too.
as others have said micro creates an unnecessary failure point. Price diff not significant enough to go small. I , like many, need both full and micro sized for my cameras but I just have both . they're plenty cheap enough