Will this sony card be ok to use with eva1?

thefilmaddict

thefilmaddict

Veteran
Will this card be fast enough for the EVA1 in 4K and at all frame rates?

Sony 128GB SF-G Series UHS-II SDXC Memory Card
B&H # SOSD128GBUII MFR # SF-G128/T1
128GB Storage Capacity
UHS-II / U3 / Class 10
Max Read Speed: 300 MB/s
Max Write Speed: 299 MB/s
Min Write Speed: 30 MB/s
Records Full HD, 3D, and 4K Video
Water / Shock / X-Ray Proof
Can Withstand Extreme Temperatures
Built-In Write-Protect Switch
Downloadable File Rescue Software
 
I called b and h. They think it would be fine for most shooting, but said they didn't think it would be reliable for 4K 60p because it's not V90. Agree?
 
With the upcoming March firmware update, EVA1 will require v60 to make use of all framerates and codecs. v90 wouldn't hurt. right now, you can get away with v30.
 
I understand we all want to save a few $$, however I have read a number of people having issues with cards across multiple sources. I highly recommend going with the Pana cards. No reported issues and quite a few using them. Myself included.
 
I’ll never understand people who cut corners with Mediacards already you are dealing with SD cards which is iffy and fragile now you want to add more unknowns to it? I remember in the Sony ex1/3 days when people were
Uding SD cards with adapters instead of the Sony cards. Every one I know has at some point suffered a breakdown and loss of media that cost them at least as much as they saved. It’s like the people who don’t want to buy a second hard drive for a backup.

Run&Gun said:
My .02 and word of advise: If the shoot and footage are important(i.e: paid job), use APPROVED media.
Click to expand...
 
icarusfilm said:
I’ll never understand people who cut corners with Mediacards already you are dealing with SD cards which is iffy and fragile now you want to add more unknowns to it? I remember in the Sony ex1/3 days when people were
Uding SD cards with adapters instead of the Sony cards. Every one I know has at some point suffered a breakdown and loss of media that cost them at least as much as they saved. It’s like the people who don’t want to buy a second hard drive for a backup.
Click to expand...

I know several people (me included) who needed hours of recording media and saved more than 1000 bucks not buying those extra expensive SxS cards.

You can read everywhere that you have to buy the Panasonic V90 cards, which which are literally the same as the Angelbird V90 cards, the latter costing half the price.
I tested really cheap Sony 128GB SDXC's costing 100 bucks - guess what: they worked in the dozens of hours I already did with the EVA1.

Just my 2c.
 
icarusfilm said:
I remember in the Sony ex1/3 days when people were using SD cards with adapters instead of the Sony cards. Every one I know has at some point suffered a breakdown and loss of media that cost them at least as much as they saved. .
Click to expand...

Funny you should mention that... You know, I'm one of those guys who used the SD card adapter with the EX1, shot hundreds of hours of client footage (and in some cases simply gave the SD card to the client at the end of the gig), never once had a problem in six years using that system. So mileage does vary...
 
Erik Wittbusch said:
I know several people (me included) who needed hours of recording media and saved more than 1000 bucks not buying those extra expensive SxS cards.

You can read everywhere that you have to buy the Panasonic V90 cards, which which are literally the same as the Angelbird V90 cards, the latter costing half the price.
I tested really cheap Sony 128GB SDXC's costing 100 bucks - guess what: they worked in the dozens of hours I already did with the EVA1.

Just my 2c.
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on what world you play in, professionally. $1000 "savings" on unknown/unapproved media vs. buying approved media is nothing. That $1000 wouldn't even cover my day-rate if something went wrong with the unapproved media. Just my peace-of-mind is worth that.

I'm not saying that nothing bad has never happened when using approved media(because it has), but when someone comes onto a message board and says they had a corruption, failure, etc. and they weren't using approved media, I don't feel bad for them. I've lost count of all the threads about buying cheap(er) unapproved media. I remember one, that I believe was about XQD cards. I think at the time the third party cards were literally a few dollars less than the Sony cards(less than $5 US difference). Why in the world would you even think about it over such a tiny amount of money? Maybe it's just my perspective from where I sit. How do you explain to a client that's paying your crew well over $2K a day that you lost the footage, because you tried to save a few dollars on cards instead of buying the media that the manufacture said to?
 
icarusfilm said:
I’ll never understand people who cut corners with Mediacards already you are dealing with SD cards which is iffy and fragile now you want to add more unknowns to it? I remember in the Sony ex1/3 days when people were
Uding SD cards with adapters instead of the Sony cards. Every one I know has at some point suffered a breakdown and loss of media that cost them at least as much as they saved. It’s like the people who don’t want to buy a second hard drive for a backup.
Click to expand...

Perhaps... But issues with SD cards were not necessarily caused by purchasing 'cheap' cards. On at least one occasion (using in a dslr that took SD cards,) I had issues with a Sandisk Extreme Pro card failure.
For my EX cameras I did buy and use SxS cards -- and though the cost per minute at 35 or 50 mbps seemed high at the time, it wasn't that insane.

Yesterday I did a basic corporate green screen interviews shoot - EVA1 was one of two cameras, and shooting at 150mbps. I went through over 400 GB of card data just on the EVA1 in a standard length day that had some breaks in it (3 holes in the schedule). Because I haven't bought too many cards yet I didn't double record as a safety (though I was running two cameras, which provided an intrinsic safety factor).
Now I'm thinking about needing to buy a lot more cards, first to be able to run a dual record backup (because I get nervous with any SD card system), and second because I'm thinking that down the line I will probably be asked for the 400 mbps speed.
So think about the numbers... Let's say that I consider 5 128's sufficient for a basic day at 150mbps. Add another 5 to be able to dual record. So start off with 10 x 128GB cards. Current street price of about $400. for Pana would be $4000. as opposed to $2200. for Sony G cards. (B&H prices)
But the elephant in the room is multiplying data rate (and card usage, and thus overall price) by 2.67 when 400mbps recording comes in. At which point an $1800 price differential becomes a $4800. savings for equivalent recording times!

No wonder that it becomes a valid question whether a more expensive card that doesn't have faster specs is actually worth the difference?
And why it's important to hear experiences others have had with different brands/models of cards.

And yes, I have some Sony G cards and have had no issues with them at 150 mbps...
 
Run&Gun said:
I guess it depends on what world you play in, professionally. $1000 "savings" on unknown/unapproved media vs. buying approved media is nothing. That $1000 wouldn't even cover my day-rate if something went wrong with the unapproved media. Just my peace-of-mind is worth that.

I'm not saying that nothing bad has never happened when using approved media(because it has), but when someone comes onto a message board and says they had a corruption, failure, etc. and they weren't using approved media, I don't feel bad for them. I've lost count of all the threads about buying cheap(er) unapproved media. I remember one, that I believe was about XQD cards. I think at the time the third party cards were literally a few dollars less than the Sony cards(less than $5 US difference). Why in the world would you even think about it over such a tiny amount of money? Maybe it's just my perspective from where I sit. How do you explain to a client that's paying your crew well over $2K a day that you lost the footage, because you tried to save a few dollars on cards instead of buying the media that the manufacture said to?
Click to expand...

FWIW, I agree. I am using unapproved (by Canon for the C200) but approved by the card manufacturer CF 2.0 cards (Egodisk says VPG-130 and works fine with the C200), half a dozen of them, to shoot two of my own two documentary films. But I am going in with eyes open, I know it is taking a calculated risk to shoot with unapproved media in a camera with only a single CFast card slot. I always shoot proxy though in 2K and if push came to shove and I had a media failure, I would still have a 2K proxy that would be good enough quality to finish the film. Thankfully, not having the best possible image is not a dealbreaker in most documentaries as much of the story on one is using Go Pro footage and lots of 1080 we shot last year even though the film will be a 4K master. We simply don't have the budget to buy or rent all of the media with approved cards that we need to shoot these films so it's a calculated risk. I feel good since we have been shooting for over six months with the cards without a single failure, so far, they have worked perfectly, but if I have a card issue, I will have nobody to blame but myself and I promise I will not post here, whinging that my Egodisk card failed on a once in a lifetime shoot ;-)

Unfortunately, self-financed documentaries (at least until we break the fundraising campaign) require risk to discover the story and you do the best you can with what you have. If I had to, I could shoot both films on my iPhone, it would be good enough because we have compelling subjects, locations and stories so I look at the gains from shooting on a real camera as icing on the cake.
 
OnSet said:
Perhaps... But issues with SD cards were not necessarily caused by purchasing 'cheap' cards. On at least one occasion (using in a dslr that took SD cards,) I had issues with a Sandisk Extreme Pro card failure.
For my EX cameras I did buy and use SxS cards -- and though the cost per minute at 35 or 50 mbps seemed high at the time, it wasn't that insane.

Yesterday I did a basic corporate green screen interviews shoot - EVA1 was one of two cameras, and shooting at 150mbps. I went through over 400 GB of card data just on the EVA1 in a standard length day that had some breaks in it (3 holes in the schedule). Because I haven't bought too many cards yet I didn't double record as a safety (though I was running two cameras, which provided an intrinsic safety factor).
Now I'm thinking about needing to buy a lot more cards, first to be able to run a dual record backup (because I get nervous with any SD card system), and second because I'm thinking that down the line I will probably be asked for the 400 mbps speed.
So think about the numbers... Let's say that I consider 5 128's sufficient for a basic day at 150mbps. Add another 5 to be able to dual record. So start off with 10 x 128GB cards. Current street price of about $400. for Pana would be $4000. as opposed to $2200. for Sony G cards. (B&H prices)
But the elephant in the room is multiplying data rate (and card usage, and thus overall price) by 2.67 when 400mbps recording comes in. At which point an $1800 price differential becomes a $4800. savings for equivalent recording times!

No wonder that it becomes a valid question whether a more expensive card that doesn't have faster specs is actually worth the difference?
And why it's important to hear experiences others have had with different brands/models of cards.

And yes, I have some Sony G cards and have had no issues with them at 150 mbps...
Click to expand...

I'm curious how many of your clients actually know and understand the difference between 150 Mbps and 400 Mbps? I know none of ours would have a clue. Not saying you specifically, but I think a lot of us get so caught up in specs, bit rates and data rates while our clients are 90% blissfully ignorant. So then it becomes up to us to provide "good enough", not always the best possible. So far with our C200, we have not had a single client want or could even be convinced to shoot Cinema RAW Light. They don't know what it is, are not set up for off line/on line/proxy workflow and when I describe it to them and show them the difference between the .MP4 and CRL, they cannot see much of a difference. Heck, two features I shot in 2016 and last year specifically WOULD NOT let me shoot in 4K, one is opening at the SXSW Film Festival this month! They didn't have the drive space, assistant editor, media costs, etc. to even shoot 4K and didn't want it because 1080 is good enough. I went to the LA Critics screening last week for the film playing SXSW and on the big screen, the 1080, shot on our C100 and C300, looked beautiful (they hired a really talented colorist to grade and finish the film). Some clients know and require specs, but in my work at least, most clients who even understand specs don't want "the best", they are happy with good enough that slots into their post workflow.
 
Last edited:
puredrifting said:
I'm curious how many of your clients actually know and understand the difference between 150 Mbps and 400 Mbps? I know none of ours would have a clue.
Click to expand...

In terms of my clients -- I'd say about 75% of them may know the difference. But the real issue is that 90% of the tech specs/requirements I receive as preferred for shoots are really driven by the edit room. So far the edit staffs have been a bit underwhelmed by the operating performance of the 150 mbps Long-GOP codec in Premiere pro - requiring them to create and work in proxies to get better edit system performance. When we see/test the 400 mbps codec, the question for them will be edit system performance, not ultimate image quality (since the quality of the 150 is great!) Most of my clients have extremely tight turnaround times, so anything that slows them down can rapidly become a deal-killer. (As an example, after one shoot with a RED camera my principal client disliked dealing with that workflow so much that they said they would never accept RED footage again.) Though as DPs we hate to admit it, often shoot specs will be dictated by delivery requirements.

The other issue with cards/costs is that although I may be able to bill for an additional camera, monitor, backdrop, or special lighting, clients normally expect me to not only provide all cards necessary for a shoot day as part of the base price, but I may be expected to hold a data backup until they've verified everything, meaning either extra cards or extra time making backups...
 
What do you think is approved media for the EVA1?

Mitch Gross already said it: There won't be a list of third party manufacturers.
Only Panasonic cards will be tested.

In other words: No cards will be approved other than Panasonic's own.

If you can't test yourself, buy those.
 
Right, which brings us back to the question of why there are so few cards certified as V60 (or V90). Are there cards already on the market that meet those standards, but aren't yet certified? Is there too little incentive for the card makers to get certified? Is the certification so new that card makers haven't yet begun labeling/marketing the certifications on their cards if they do meet the standards? Or, are the card makers just not really there... yet? I still can't find anything that explains this.

I take full responsibility for some pain as an early adopter of a camera that promises to put a 400mbps 4K codec on an SD card (which is still kind of nuts when I think about it), but I am also just astonished at how the SD card market doesn't seem to be in alignment... at all. I would have thought, that as in the case with the RAW recorders, that maybe Panasonic would have been in partnership with some other companies to help create a market for their advancements. After all, this camera was advertised as being able to shoot 4K on "affordable" SD cards. Not so much if the only game in town is the Panasonic branded card (and a few "off-brands" like Delkin and Angelbird... no offense to anyone here, btw).

I appreciate what Mitch said about the company not providing a list of "approved cards" from third-party vendors. It's unfortunate that Panasonic can't be more helpful in this, but I get why they prefer to avoid doing that, and I believe him when he says that it's not to maintain a market advantage. But at this stage in the game, that's more or less what it is. $400 for a 128GB card? Yikes!

Honestly, more than 99% of what I shoot on the EVA1 is for paid work, so if Panasonic says that you need a V60 card (or faster) to shoot All-I codecs, then that is exactly what I will be using. I don't work retail video production with a lot of "one-and-done" clients, so I can't really afford to fail anyone and expect that word won't get out about me (or my "new fangled camera" that's "like the FS7, but not"). I likewise can't afford the potential sunk cost of stocking up on cards that may or may not work.

So, until the market for these cards diversifies a bit more, or when I finally get fed-up working with LongGOP files (not sure which will happen first), the reality is I'll likely just sit out on Firmware 2.0 for a while... which is a bummer (but, see paragraph 2 above).
 
Just to carify things, Panasonic does and right now is working with some 3rd party manufacturers to test their cards. Those manufacturers may decide to state that their cards work well with the EVA1, but don't expect us to state it. Because we can't control what those manufacturers do or do not do. We would all have to enter into contractual agreements and then there are places where that can be seen as restraint of trade and a whole host of issues that pop up. So yeah, we try to help other companies because we know that people will want to use their products. But we can't be doing "certifications" because that's a legal term and it brings with it a whole host of issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top