AlainAlain
Active member
Lexar cFast card not recognized bij Camera and Mac
this is a huge problem, I had a shoot for a whole day with unreplacable footage
this is a huge problem, I had a shoot for a whole day with unreplacable footage
C300: Lexar cFast card not recognized bij Camera and Mac
- Thread starter AlainAlain
- Start date
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
What speed was the Lexar CFast card? 3400x or 3500x?
bij camera? By? You mean you shot a whole day of footage on a Lexar CFast card and now neither the Mac computer or the camera recognizes the footage? Did you try a PC?
bij camera? By? You mean you shot a whole day of footage on a Lexar CFast card and now neither the Mac computer or the camera recognizes the footage? Did you try a PC?
AlainAlain
Active member
3400x on a C300M2 I shot on 1920/1080
Lexar 3400x CFast 2.0 cards are not approved by Canon for use with C300mk2 and these Lexar cards are known to loose footage in Canon C300mk2. It's not about the write speed, apparently. It's something else that causes havoc. I know people who have lost footage on two Lexar 3400x cards in BOTH slots during a shoot.
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
I use Lexar 3500x and haven't had any issues. The 3500x are officially approved for the C300 Mark II by Lexar; the 3400x are not officially approved by Lexar. Neither Lexar cards are officially approved by Canon; Canon has only officially approved the SanDisk.
Run&Gun
Veteran
Who cares UNLESS they are approved by CANON? I've said it before in other threads, DO NOT USE ANY MEDIA THAT IS NOT APPROVED BY THE EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER REGARDLESS OF WHAT "SOME GUY ON THE INTERNET" SAYS. Or even if the media manufacturer says "it works".
To the OP: I'm really sorry that you lost your entire days worth of unreplaceable footage(it's a reality/danger we all face) and I hope that it doesn't cost you a client, but if you weren't using Canon approved cards, you really have no one to blame, but yourself.
The funny thing is, I use nothing but Lexar Pro cards in my Canon still cameras. But all/only Sandisk "Canon Approved" cards in my C300
Last edited:
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
I do. Lexar is a reputable company. If they officially approved a card for a particular camera, would you not think that there was a reason they did so? You think they're just making up out of thin air that the 3500x cards are compatible with the C300 Mark II?
Canon is a big company and doesn't necessarily have the time to keep up with each new type of CFast Card coming to the market to do rigorous tests to see if each new manufacturer's card works with their cameras. As such, those tests end up being done by the users. Right now we're still in the early stages of using various types of cards, so nothing is proven. If after say a year no one has issues with the cards that Canon never took the time officially test, then it would probably be safe to say that those cards are safe to use. In the meantime, us early adopters are taking risks, even with approved SanDisk cards which could still have a higher fail rate than other unapproved cards despite Canon approving them.
For myself, I'd rather have a 256 GB card that has a little more risk to it than a 128 GB card that has less risk to it, simply because 128 GB's is insufficient for how much in-camera storage I like for the way I shoot. It means changing memory cards more often and likely not using dual record, both of which are factors in losing files either through corruption or through misplaced or disorganized memory cards.
I recall back when I was shooting 16 to 32 GB memory cards on Canon DSLRs how we'd have three cards per camera for a wedding, times five or six cameras, so around 16 cards just for cameras, a few more for audio, and it was a lot easier to loose footage with so many cards going around in the middle of the shoot then with my current setup of using one 64GB card in my C100s (which have lower data rates than Canon DSLRs) for the whole day and using dual record.
Since when do memory cards need to be officially approved by the camera manufacturer anyway? For all of the past memory card cameras I've used (Canon DSLRs, GH2, C100, HMC40, EX1, etc.) we tended to use a wide variety of cards without ever checking if they were "officially approved" by the camera manufacturer. Why would the C300 Mark II be different?
AlainAlain
Active member
Thnak you for all the reply's, but is there software to recover my data? I know there is for photo's, but is there for this material too?
Run&Gun
Veteran
First off, yes Lexar IS a reputable company. I have used and still use their cards in my still cams.
Now, what reason can you think of for Lexar saying their cards will work? To sell cards. Yes, it's that simple.
And unless you've been been living in a cave for the last five years, you should know that all memory cards are not the same. I'm not an engineer, but all memory are not manufactured the same, "wired" the same or have the same type of controllers in them. The C300 mkII isn't special. This isn't a phenomenon specific to just it. It happens with other cameras and recording equipment. I used to be a non-believer about using only approved media. I strayed from the approved list with my SD 664 when I first got it and guess what...? Recordings were unusable. Went to the approved cards and haven't had a problem since. This thread was started because the OP used non-approved cards and as a result lost his footage. Is that not enough of a reason to use cards vetted by the people that know the recording devices best?
Run&Gun
Veteran
I hope you're doing that on your own time and not with paying clients.
Run&Gun
Veteran
That's usually for when someone has formatted/erased a card and hasn't used it yet again. I'm guessing you may not actually have any usable data on your cards, unfortunately. Hopefully I'm wrong, though. Lexar or Sandisk used to include with their cards a free license to use their data recovery software. There is also software available on the Internet and companies that specialize in data recovery, but the service is not cheap.
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
I meant us early adopters are taking risks by using a new camera which hasn't been field tested over the course of a year or years. New cameras often have issues when first in use, hence early adopters take risks, not just with regards to what memory card they choose. Even Philip Bloom returned his Red due to reliability issues which from what I gather have since been solved for the most part. Yet, yes, of course I use the C300 Mark II on paid shoots.Eric Coughlin said:
Right. So you're basically saying that Lexar, a company that you consider reputable, has said the 3500x cards are compatible with the C300 Mark II, not because of any legitimate tests or data they have on the matter, but purely because they wanted to sell cards which you're saying have a high chance of failure since Canon has not officially approved them. Or in other words, the "reputable" Lexar is not in fact reputable, despite you just saying they are reputable, and that they are basically trying to make some quick money before people figure out their 3500x cards are faulty in regards to use with the C300 Mark II.
So then what did you mean when you agreed they are a reputable company? That they are generally reputable, but in this specific instance have resorted to poor business practices? Let's keep in mind that Lexar never officially stated the 3400x cards which the OP used as being compatible with the C300 Mark II as they have done with the 3500x cards.
I know not all cards are the same. The only point I was making is most cameras work with a wide variety of manufacturers cards (even if some manufacturers are known for having more reliable cards), and most cameras do not release "officially approved lists" of what manufactures cards they are compatible with, so the C300 Mark II is different in that regard. That is, unless I'm unaware that all previous memory card cameras have had official lists of approved cards released with the camera. I know some do, like the Black Magic Ursa Mini, but I'm under the impression most don't, such as the C100.
Last edited:
Run&Gun
Veteran
The cards may very well have worked just fine in the tests that Lexar performed. But they may not be testing and stressing them in ways that Canon is and therefore Canon may be seeing failures that Lexar didn't or hasn't that are unacceptable in Canon's eyes. This isn't about what I think of Lexar as a company, it's about if the media has been vetted and approved by the recording device manufacturer to work together. They have not. Plain and simple. You can scream it at the top of your lungs from the tallest mountain till the cows come home that Lexar has tested the cards and they say they work with the camera, but that does not change the fact that Canon has not. Now, maybe you get lucky and don't have any issues or not at first, but what happens when it does? And it all could have been avoided by using cards already vetted by the company that built and knows the camera best? And it's probably not just a one time test from the equipment manufacturers, either. I've seen them pull approvals before, because card makers changed something in the manufacturing process of the same cards and they started causing errors.
You may be willing to take unnecessary risks with your clients footage, I'm not.
Someone posted a video of the testing procedure that, I believe Sound Devices, goes through with media. It's pretty impressive. I can't see a third party media manufacturer doing the same with each individual device that their cards may be used in. The equipment maker has more at stake to make sure their equipment works.
You may be willing to take unnecessary risks with your clients footage, I'm not.
Someone posted a video of the testing procedure that, I believe Sound Devices, goes through with media. It's pretty impressive. I can't see a third party media manufacturer doing the same with each individual device that their cards may be used in. The equipment maker has more at stake to make sure their equipment works.
And even that is not enough! Delkin CF 32GB 700X which was bundled with Sound Devices gear (and with AJA gear too). Worked perfectly in the manufacturers' equipment, failed miserably in various card readers. A lethal combination of very high failure rate and approval from a company that is highly trusted. Took a very long time for Sound Devices to hone up and specify the Serial no range that was affected.
Bottom line is: You have to test all the way! Not just recording device! Particularly for memory cards that don't have a Write Protection Switch! Like CF and CFast...
Sorry to derail discussion.
Run&Gun
Veteran
You do bring up a good point. Card readers aren't really thought about a lot, at least it doesn't seem like it. I've had CF readers completely die, but I don't think I've had one do that. That would scare the hell out of you on a shoot. I have run into issues with some Sony SxS readers and Sony G series XQD Cards/Sony SxS adapters. They would DL until almost done, then hang and drop. But using the Sony XQD readers that come with the cards work like champs. I was glad I didn't spend several hundred dollars on an SxS reader because the "free" XQD ones work better(for my set-up).