«

Neil Jones wrote:

> Thank you for replying. This explanation is very helpful. When I
> bought my Powershot G3 in late 2004, the term "Prosumer" was used a lot
> since, at that time it was one of the high-end P&S cameras. Technology
> has evolved a lot and now I am hearing other terms as SuperZooms,
> MegaZooms and Micro Four Thirds (that is something I learned today).

The G3 was one of the best G series cameras. Still had the articulated
LCD (which the G10 doesn't have), and they didn't go crazy with
megapixels so noise isn't as bad. Too bad there's no CHDK for the G1,
G2, G3, G5, or G6.

The G10 is of the same lineage, but they've decontented it. The G10 is
$415. You can get a D-SLR for about that, though you'll need to spend
something on lenses if you don't already have some EOS lenses.

SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> Neil Jones wrote:
> >
> > The battery life is another thing that is very important for me as well..
> > *I have ruled out Canon Powershot SX10 IS, since they take AA batteries
> > (but recommend NiMH).
>
> Yes, it's really too bad that Canon cheaped out in that way. Yet AA
> batteries aren't as bad as they were in the past with the advent of
> Eneloop cells with low self-discharge.

Plus some of us consider the ubiquitous and non-proprietary AA
batteries to be a feature, not a liability, as it means we're able to
reduce the proliferation of chargers and types of spares we carry (in
context of other additional electronic devices also in use). Its just
a different perspective and slight shift in personal priorities.


-hh

John Navas <spamfilt...@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 15:12:07 -0500, MartinS <m...@my.place> wrote:
> >-hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Plus some of us consider the ubiquitous and non-proprietary AA
> >> batteries to be a feature, not a liability, as it means we're able to
> >> reduce the proliferation of chargers and types of spares we carry (in
> >> context of other additional electronic devices also in use). *Its just
> >> a different perspective and slight shift in personal priorities.
>
> >Plus, if your batteries run out somewhere where you can't recharge them,
> >you can use regular alkalines or lithium.

Agreed; I alluded to that with 'ubiquitous', but could have been more
clear.

> True, but almost as easy to use an external adapter that powers the
> device from external AA batteries. *I used to have one for my cell
> phone. *I've considered getting one for my cameras, but went with spare
> batteries instead.

That's another possibility, and while it does solve the "oops, forgot
to charge my batteries", it doesn't generally relieve the problems of
"how much stuff" is being carried.

Another factor in their favor is that even superior quality
(2000+mAhr) NiMH AA's are a good bang for the buck. I paid $15 for a
pack of 4 last month at B&H, whereas when one looks at the proprietary
camera batteries, you're often in for a royal soaking. For example,
the ~800mAh CGR-S006 battery for the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ28 is $50
for the OEM and $28 for the 3rd party aftermarket version. And the
1400mAh BP-511A for Canon DSLR's is effectively no better: $50 and
$25. When you compare by actual power stored, the AAs are around
1/10th the cost per mAh.


-hh

-hh wrote:

> Another factor in their favor is that even superior quality
> (2000+mAhr) NiMH AA's are a good bang for the buck. I paid $15 for a
> pack of 4 last month at B&H, whereas when one looks at the proprietary
> camera batteries, you're often in for a royal soaking. For example,
> the ~800mAh CGR-S006 battery for the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ28 is $50
> for the OEM and $28 for the 3rd party aftermarket version. And the
> 1400mAh BP-511A for Canon DSLR's is effectively no better: $50 and
> $25. When you compare by actual power stored, the AAs are around
> 1/10th the cost per mAh.

Wrong, on many counts.

First, the after-market CGA-S006 is $20
("http://sterlingtek.com/pacgcgcgforp.html") while the aftermarket BP511
is $12 ("http://sterlingtek.com/caeodicaba.html"). It's not really fair
to look at one of the most expensive places to buy after-market
batteries when you make your calculations (though even at the B&H prices
you're incorrect). Note that the Sterlingtek prices are by no means the
lowest available, but I didn't want to use some of the prices of eBay
vendors of unknown quality.

Second, power is not measured in mAH, it's measured in W (or mW).

Thrid, batteries don't store power, they store energy.

Fourth, power is not what you need to compare, energy is what you need
to measure, in WH (or mWH) when you compare costs.

Here are some true comparisons:

A $20, 7.4V, 1800mAH, CGA-S006 stores 13.3WH of energy at a cost of
$1.50 per WH.

A $12 7.4V, 2000mAH BP511 stores 14.8WH of energy at a cost of $0.81 per WH.

A $2.50 1.2V, 2000mAH, Sanyo Eneloop AA cell stores 2.4WH of energy at a
cost of $1.04 per WH.

So in reality, the Li-Ion battery can cost slightly more or less than
the AA batteries, depending on which Li-Ion battery you need.

The real issues regarding the pros and cons of the different batteries
are not related to cost. The sole advantage of AA batteries is that in a
pinch you can buy alkaline AA batteries almost anywhere in the world
(and you're much more likely to need to buy batteries in a pinch for an
AA powered camera!).

For a good web site on this topic, type "nimh vs li-ion" into the Google
search box then click on "I'm Feeling Lucky". It's the premier web site
for information on camera batteries and their trade-offs.

In article <oEW2l.8499$(E-Mail Removed)>, SMS
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Second, power is not measured in mAH, it's measured in W (or mW).
>
> Thrid, batteries don't store power, they store energy.
>
> Fourth, power is not what you need to compare, energy is what you need
> to measure, in WH (or mWH) when you compare costs.

semantics.

> For a good web site on this topic, type "nimh vs li-ion" into the Google
> search box then click on "I'm Feeling Lucky". It's the premier web site
> for information on camera batteries and their trade-offs.

translated: my own site comes up and i get revenue if you click, but i
will suggest using google so it won't look like i'm shilling.

On Dec 19, 5:18Â*pm, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <oEW2l.8499$W06.5...@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com>, SMS
>
> <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> > Second, power is not measured in mAH, it's measured in W (or mW).
>
> > Thrid, batteries don't store power, they store energy.
>
> > Fourth, power is not what you need to compare, energy is what you need
> > to measure, in WH (or mWH) when you compare costs.
>
> semantics.

No it isn't semantics at all. Comparing mAH of Li-Ion batteries versus
NiMH batteries as hh has done is meaningless, which is one reason that
he came up with the idea that AA batteries cost 1/10 as much as Li-Ion
batteries. I don't think he made this mistake intentionally. It's
easy to make this mistake if you're used to car batteries (all
nominally 12 volt) which are rated in AH.

Some P&S cameras use two AA batteries, for a voltage of 2.4V (for
NiMH), some use four AA batteries for a voltage of 4.8V (for NiMH).
For Li-Ion powered cameras, some use a one cell battery at 3.7V, some
use a two cell battery at 7.4V. When you compare the storage capacity
of camera batteries you _must_ look at WH, which is the product of the
mAH and the voltage.

If you're actually interested in the facts on the cost differential,
go to "http://batterydata.com/" and go to the section "$ £ ¥ € лв ₪ NT
$ å…ƒ Z$". I compare the cost per WH of various OEM and after-market
batteries from different sources. Or do your own spreadsheet. Sorry to
confuse you with the facts.

> translated: my own site comes up and i get revenue if you click, but i
> will suggest using google so it won't look like i'm shilling.

I get no revenue if you click. The only time I ever get revenue is if
someone uses one of the affiliate links to Amazon or B&H or Adorama.
It's $100 in a good quarter. The reason I suggest that people use the
search engine is because I want it to be clear that these sites are
very highly rated. It's a question of credibility.

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems MartinS <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> -hh <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
>>> Neil Jones wrote:
>>> >
>>> > The battery life is another thing that is very important for me as
>>> > well . I have ruled out Canon Powershot SX10 IS, since they take
>>> > AA batteri es (but recommend NiMH).
>>>
>>> Yes, it's really too bad that Canon cheaped out in that way. Yet AA
>>> batteries aren't as bad as they were in the past with the advent of
>>> Eneloop cells with low self-discharge.
>>
>> Plus some of us consider the ubiquitous and non-proprietary AA
>> batteries to be a feature, not a liability, as it means we're able to
>> reduce the proliferation of chargers and types of spares we carry (in
>> context of other additional electronic devices also in use). Its just
>> a different perspective and slight shift in personal priorities.

> Plus, if your batteries run out somewhere where you can't recharge them,
> you can use regular alkalines or lithium.

If a Li-on battery camera has a battery recharging socket then it's
easy enough to make up an AA battery of the appropriate voltage with
the right plug on the end. Then you can have the best of both worlds.

--
Chris Malcolm

Chris Malcolm wrote:

> If a Li-on battery camera has a battery recharging socket then it's
> easy enough to make up an AA battery of the appropriate voltage with
> the right plug on the end. Then you can have the best of both worlds.

Very few Li-Ion powered cameras (or AA powered cameras for that matter)
have internal chargers any more. My Canon G2 has that feature, but
current G series models don't have it.

You could still charge the Li-Ion battery with ten AA cells and a 12V
charger. All this assumes that you're in a place with no AC or DC power.
But the advantage of the AA cells is that you just buy some Alkaline or
Lithium disposable batteries at the convenience store, and you don't
need to worry about chargers, cables, etc.

For a D-SLR, most of the vertical grips can take six AA cells or two
Li-Ion packs.

SMS wrote:
> Chris Malcolm wrote:
>
>> If a Li-on battery camera has a battery recharging socket then it's
>> easy enough to make up an AA battery of the appropriate voltage
>> with
>> the right plug on the end. Then you can have the best of both
>> worlds.
>
> Very few Li-Ion powered cameras (or AA powered cameras for that
> matter) have internal chargers any more. My Canon G2 has that
> feature, but current G series models don't have it.
>
> You could still charge the Li-Ion battery with ten AA cells and a
> 12V
> charger. All this assumes that you're in a place with no AC or DC
> power. But the advantage of the AA cells is that you just buy some
> Alkaline or Lithium disposable batteries at the convenience store,
> and you don't need to worry about chargers, cables, etc.

Buy a lot of them though--on some cameras alkalines are only good for
a dozen or so shots, and lithiums are not likely to be convenience
store items anywhere that there's no power to charge NiMH or lithium
ion.

> For a D-SLR, most of the vertical grips can take six AA cells or two
> Li-Ion packs.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

In article
<d9c43a36-2d66-4638-b7cc-(E-Mail Removed)>,
Chinese Bicycle Guy <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On Dec 19, 5:18*pm, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > In article <oEW2l.8499$W06.5...@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com>, SMS
> >
> > <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> > > Second, power is not measured in mAH, it's measured in W (or mW).
> >
> > > Thrid, batteries don't store power, they store energy.
> >
> > > Fourth, power is not what you need to compare, energy is what you need
> > > to measure, in WH (or mWH) when you compare costs.
> >
> > semantics.
>
> No it isn't semantics at all.

yes it is. hh mistakenly called it power instead of mah and you jumped
on him. it's obvious what he meant.

> > translated: my own site comes up and i get revenue if you click, but i
> > will suggest using google so it won't look like i'm shilling.
>
> I get no revenue if you click. The only time I ever get revenue is if
> someone uses one of the affiliate links to Amazon or B&H or Adorama.
> It's $100 in a good quarter. The reason I suggest that people use the
> search engine is because I want it to be clear that these sites are
> very highly rated. It's a question of credibility.

that's a laugh. just because something shows up in google doesn't make
it credible, plus a lot of what's on your page has been discredited.