«

Ron Hunter wrote:

> The bottom line is still the availability of AA batteries. Yesterday,
> my wife's camera showed symptoms of low battery (it turned out to have
> gotten wet), and since we had taken about all the pictures we wanted, I
> did nothing about it, but I COULD have just driven 2 blocks and bought
> AA alkaline batteries. With lithium ion batteries, this would not have
> been an option.

The camera with Li-Ion batteries would have been far, far less likely to
have shown symptoms of low battery, real or imagined. That's the real
bottom line.

nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Chinese Bicycle Guy <scharf.ste...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > > 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.

Nevertheless, I did make a mistake: to compare Amp-hours is only
valid within the same voltage battery. As such, the OEM-vs-
Aftermarket comparisons were valid, but to compare a battery pack to a
single 1.2v NiMH **might not** be: it depends on the voltage of said
battery pack.

In general (ie, I haven't gone to look, or pulled out a multimeter to
test one), I'd expect that some of these battery packs are in the 3V
or higher range, which would then require the cost comparison to be of
"one OEM versus two AAs", or maybe 4 AA's, whatever. Which simply
means that for the rough comparison I made, instead of there being a
10:1 favorable ratio, its only 5:1 or perhaps 2.5:1, depending on what
the OEM:AA voltage ratios happen to be.

So while I appreciate the correction, I don't particularly appreciate
the general intent of the statement being overlooked: even though
cost really isn't my primary factor for me for the question of AAs vs.
proprietary battery formats, it is another thing in its favor.


-hh

SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> Ron Hunter wrote:
> > ...*Yesterday,
> > my wife's camera showed symptoms of low battery (it turned out to have
> > gotten wet)...
>
> The camera with Li-Ion batteries would have been far, far less likely to
> have shown symptoms of low battery, real or imagined. That's the real
> bottom line.

Really? How?

When there's an electrical discharge through a water-facilitated short
circuit, how does the type of power supply make for any difference?
Are you suggesting that all cameras with Li-Ion batteries inherently
have better waterproof seals (to keep them from getting wet) because
there's some law that says that they must?


-hh

John Navas <spamfilt...@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> >John Navas <spamfilt...@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >> 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.
>
> The batteries are too small and light for that to be an issue. My case
> couldn't really be any smaller even without them.

'Small and Light' depends on how one is counting.

For example, if I'm just going out for the day, the physical battery
charger is left at home, so its size/weight doesn't matter.

But when one is packing for a trip (one long enough to need more than
just one+spare power), then the chargers have to get packed, and the
more proliferation of battery types one has, the more chargers (and
spare batteries) we end up with. If we then are going someplace
remote enough that you want to reduce risks by having redundancy in
chargers (not just _A_ spare battery), then this logistical tail
becomes even bigger.

And with the advent of modern electronics, everything invariably has a
battery to consider how to support:

Cellphone
iPod & Noise-cancel headset for iPod
Alarm clock(s)
Flashlight(s)
Camera(s)
Camera strobe(s)
Arctic Butterfly
Digital Wallet(s)
Stabilized Binoculars
GPS
PVS-14
etc.

Based on a list like the above, one can quickly discover that you may
very well be carrying ~20 powered devices with which to deliberate
their care & feeding.

From a 'Reductio ad absurdium' perspective, if they all took unique
proprietary batteries that each needed their own charger, then we
would be stuck around carrying 20 chargers and 20 different types of
spares.

The reality is that it isn't quite this bad. For example,
wristwatches weren't mentioned because their button-batteries
typically last years. The basic point here is that there's value in
standardizing of battery form factors/types. Thus, the next question
is merely in the details of which specific batteries to standardize
upon, and why is X or Y a good or bad selection.

From a recent trip, I found that I carried 17 discrete devices that
used 6 different types of batteries (ignoring stuff that used long
life button-batteries). Their distribution breakdown was:

Battery Type#1: used by 7 devices
Battery Type#2: used by 5 devices
Battery Type#3: used by 2 devices
Battery Type#4: used by 1 device
Battery Type#5: used by 1 device
Battery Type#6: used by 1 device

For chargers:
Charger A: recharged #1 & #2
Charger B: recharged #2 only
Charger C: recharged #3 only
Charger D: recharged #4 & #5

You'll note that on the above, Charger B seems superfluous: it was
present so as to add redundancy for Type#2 and also increase
recharging capacity. Basic reason for this is that Type##2 are AA's
and that in general, a lot of generic consumer devices already use AA
(and AAA) batteries. Here, there were sets of 4, 4, 4, 4, 2 (camera,
external strobe, two digital wallets, and a GPS) which were in heavy
daily use. These five devices shared a pool of six AAs for spares and
in a pinch, they can cannibalize too. Taking this into consideration
with a similar case with Charger A (Type#1: AAAs), we end up with 2
chargers supporting 12 devices, or a ratio of 1:6 instead of 1:1,
which results in some amount of size/weight savings.

While this may all sound to be relatively small, when you're working
with flights on small charter aircraft, every little bit starts to add
up. We had a 17kg total (all gear, all clothes) weight limit per
person, so many items invariably get cut and left behind.


> > 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. ...
>
> I just got an OEM battery for $20. At that price cost is not an issue
> to me.

I merely used B&H for all prices; its convenient, verifiable by others
(if they really care) and even if an item is a bit more expensive
there, because of consolidation into a larger order, there's no
shipping cost to consider as part of the true total cost. In any
case, I mostly look at the cost factor as "gravy", since it is a
higher personal priority to reduce equipment size/weight by being able
to carry fewer rechargers.


-hh

-hh wrote:

> Nevertheless, I did make a mistake: to compare Amp-hours is only
> valid within the same voltage battery. As such, the OEM-vs-
> Aftermarket comparisons were valid, but to compare a battery pack to a
> single 1.2v NiMH **might not** be: it depends on the voltage of said
> battery pack.

Pretty rare. For my D-SLR I could compare the six AA batteries at 7.2V
in the vertical grip to one or two BP511 batteries in the vertical grip
at 7.4 volts, and it'd be fairly close to compare just mAH. Six 2000 maH
Eneloops would cost $15. One 2000mAH after market BP511 from a reputable
supplier costs $12. The cost advantage of the Li-Ion is slight, and of
course for less common Li-Ion packs the Eneloops would have a slight
advantage. Of course I can store twice as much energy in the vertical
grip with two 2000mAH Li-Ion packs than I can with six 2000mAH Eneloop
AA cells, which illustrates why AA battery powered cameras are usually
found only at the low end (with a few exceptions) where the manufacturer
want to avoid the expense of providing a charger and a battery pack.

I don't know what you originally meant because most P&S cameras use two
or four AA batteries (2.4V or 4.8V for NiMH) or a one or two cell Li-Ion
pack (3.7V or 7.4V). With a more than 50% difference in the voltage
between the NiMH batteries and the Li-Ion batteries it only makes sense
to compare the energy stored in each.

In any case, the bottom line is that AA batteries don't cost 1/10 as
much as Li-Ion packs, when you compare WH to WH they're pretty close in
price.

John Navas <spamfilt...@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> >John Navas <spamfilt...@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >> The batteries are too small and light for that to be an issue. *My case
> >> couldn't really be any smaller even without them.
>
> >'Small and Light' depends on how one is counting.
>
> True, but the battery is only 43.5 g. *
> Would you not count that as light? *

How much does it weigh, including its charger?


-hh

On Dec 20, 10:50*am, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> -hh wrote:
> > Nevertheless, I did make a mistake: *to compare Amp-hours is only
> > valid within the same voltage battery. *As such, the OEM-vs-
> > Aftermarket comparisons were valid, but to compare a battery pack to a
> > single 1.2v NiMH **might not** be: *it depends on the voltage of said
> > battery pack.
>
> Pretty rare.

Rare for which? That the OEM and aftermarket will have different
voltages? Its pretty much a sure thing (but not 100%) that a battery
pack isn't going to be the same voltage as a *single* AA, which was
where I erred.

> Six 2000 maH Eneloops would cost $15. One 2000mAH after
> market BP511 from a reputable supplier costs $12.

Wouldn't mind seeing a couple of online cites for 'reputable
suppliers' for this price point on the BP511, with the usual
assumptions (small quantities, includes shipping costs, etc). I find
it quite odd that B&H would seem to be so competitive on one product
(the AAs) and not another (BP-511A).


> I don't know what you originally meant because most P&S cameras use two
> or four AA batteries (2.4V or 4.8V for NiMH) or a one or two cell Li-Ion
> pack (3.7V or 7.4V). With a more than 50% difference in the voltage
> between the NiMH batteries and the Li-Ion batteries it only makes sense
> to compare the energy stored in each.

Agreed.

> In any case, the bottom line is that AA batteries don't cost 1/10 as
> much as Li-Ion packs, when you compare WH to WH they're pretty close in
> price.

It is closer, but there's cost considerations in other parts of the
overall system that also afford some economies. For example, with
standardization, you don't need to buy or carry as many discrete
spares, so having a set of four AAs for $15 can be the backup for more
than one device that would otherwise each take a different $20-$28
battery pack.

In my example mentioned earlier, I had six AAs (call that $20 total
cost) providing backup for five (5) devices, so that's $20 replacing 5*
$20=$100 (a 1:5 cost ratio) at your price points, or replacing 5*$28=
$140 (a 1:7 cost ratio) at my price point.

Incorporate the respective costs of multiple chargers and 1:10 cost
ratio isn't at all out of question.


-hh

X-DMCA-Complaints-To: (E-Mail Removed)

John Navas <spamfilt...@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> *-hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>
> >How much does it weigh, including its charger?
>
> I don't really need to bring the charger, but it's almost as
> light as the battery, and lives in the case.

Understood, but its still not zero, and what may be insignificant to
you (or me) on its own, may not necessarily always be so. Its
increasingly easy to get nickel-and-dime'd to death with similarly
"small/light" items: individually, they may not be a big deal, but in
aggregate sum, they add up.

As such, I don't consider even a 43.5g battery to be "light" when I
don't have the context identified. Afterall, the context may require
ten of these batteries, which adds up to a pound, and 1lb is a quick
5% of the total weight budget allowed for your porter on the Inca
trail...etc.

What may work just fine when operating out of the back of your truck
only 5 miles from home may become another thing when you're 500 miles
from the nearest pavement.


-hh

On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 20:09:41 -0500, Neil Jones wrote:

> Most of the current cameras have video recording capabilities. While it
> is not most important thing for me, I have been checking/comparing
> cameras that fall in the G10(Prosumer or whatever) class of cameras.
>
> 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).

That's surprising. I don't have a G10 manual, but the G7 that it's
based upon rates the battery life at 220 images/charge (CIPA test
using 50% full power flash). The SX10 IS does better, rated at 340
images per set of alkalines and 600 images/charge using NiMH cells,
also per the CIPA test. Canon's cameras typically get 2 to 3 times
the number of shots in non-CIPA tests since the flash isn't used.
With NiMH cells that should result in from 600 to well over 1,000
shots per charge, depending on how often the flash is used. The G10
is newer and much better than the G7 and its NB-7L battery has
greater capacity than the G7's NB-2LH, but I'd be surprised if it
reaches the battery life of the SX10 IS. I think that you'd be
satisfied with any camera whose battery life is as good as, or
slightly less than that of the SX100 IS. If you're ruling out the
SX10 IS because it uses AA cells and not because of its assumed
battery life, that's another matter, and since it's your money, you
also get to be called "The Decider".