TOP, is the the "big brands" nothing to ...

skeptical I was opposed to purchasing a map of this relatively unknown manufacturer. After I had researched however, something that my decision was increasingly simplified. On the American market, the manufacturer is not as unknown as ours. Also test here have been very good.
Now I have bought this card and also the SD card with 64GB.
Both I use in my EOS 5DMK3. I'm excited. I had previously Lexmark Professional with 32GB (1000x) as "immerdrinn" and a SanDisk SD slot.
Generally, I take on the image data in RAW format, and if time is of essence for shipment to press or print media parallel to the SD card then in JPG format.
But neither in speed points, nor the reliability I can find something negative. I have no tests durchgefüht who write raw numbers and evaluate special with me count the practicality.
Here I can just say that even with the maximum image number of continuous shots at sports photography did not have to wait once on the map.
After almost 3,000 images, which I have stored continuously on the map and also reloaded into the computer, there is only to say, "Why buy a -MARKE- expensively if they bring here for a fraction of the same power ... "
I use to read into the computer system or the Lexar USB 3.0 Dual Slot Reader. Again, I can veststellen no difference. As already said, pure feeling and compared to the 32GB Lexar Professional card. With the same number of images and even with almost full 128GB card it is transmitted quite quickly onto the computer. (RAW format ...)

Conclusion:
Clear recommendation for the brand and both types of cards (SD and CF card).
Especially for the average consumer, who is certainly not just every month shoot 500 images, this card is a buy rating. because selbt if this gives up the ghost after 10,000 images, man is still more economical on the road, than the more expensive "known" brands.
Apart from that you get here for the price of a stamp card at least. Two of this manufacturer. Thus, always in reserve, only for those who would like to be redundant way ... ;-)

Greeting, Uwe