Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > Batteries or Power Packs

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 6, 2003, 12:24 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 39
Default CR-V3 v NiMh v Lithum AA's

Greets!,
after much searching on the web I could not find a decent
comparsion between these types of cells. So here are the
results from my own testing.

Camera : fuji 40i

Test method: 40i left on with lcd pointing a subject (wall!)

End point: timed until camera turns itself off

NiMh [2300mah uniross AA ] : 1h 45min

Lithum [e2's rated 2900mah] :1h 45 min

CR-V3 [duracell ultra's 3000mah] :1h 50 min!

amazing eh?
- so the 'lasts 2x as long as lithum aa's' is total
marketing [email protected]!. Also the cr-v3 cost 2x as much
as the e2 lithums!.

theres more -
after discharging the cr-v3 I took it apart, just to
find two solder tab topped aa cells!
There proberly using just lithum aa's (with slightly more
capacity using solder tabs) , then charging twice as much.


Result:

for colder climates / long shelf life use Lithum AA's
for frequent photographing use the 2300 NimH's

Cheers
Jenk.
jenk is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jul 6, 2003, 10:28 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

This is not surprising.

Consumer reports did a report awhile back on batteries. Most of the new "higher power" batteries were not worth the money. They were 10-20% more powerful (in mah) but cost a lot more than 10-20% more. A complete rip off, unless you really, absolute, had to have the most powerful batteries made. Almost no one has that requirement.

I don't think the CR-V3 batteries were out then, but its the same general scam... ah, concept.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2003, 9:09 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 430
Default

jenk-
Thanks for the time and energy that went in to your tests and for sharing the results with us.

Your tests and results provide an interesting and valuable data point, however, I wonder if this steady state constant medium current power drain test tells the whole story when comparing these batteries. Digital cameras place unusual stess on batteries because in addition to the steady power demands of the LCD they present very high current low duty cycle demands on the battery when charging the flash and when writing the image to the memory card.

It would be interesting to see how these same battery types might compare if your LCD tests also included cycles of shooting (memory writing) with and without flash using duty cycle times that were somewhat representative of normal use.
jawz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2003, 11:43 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

A great resource for info about rechargeable batteries is this:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/ACCS/BATTS/BATTS.HTM

It's a little out of date, but its still quite useful and interesting.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2003, 1:41 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 39
Default

jawz - the purpose of my test was to show a 'constant' discharge
rate, as the guy in the link above tests his batterys.

Ok so its not a proper test that a dp reviewer would do- agreed
but it still shows that the cr-v3 is overpriced for its capacity, wether
used in a camera or mp3 player etc.

I just needed to know the price/ capacity ratio for all the new batteries.

I did do another test using my 2000mah batts that came with
the charger which I took one photo, straight after another with
the lcd on and vga format(640x480).

I managed 1000 + another 490 with the flash on.

This you could argue is not a proper dp test either, but testing
battery life varies from which site you visit.

Its a shame that manufactures datasheets don't give all the
info needed - ie, the capacity of the nihm cells there using for
comparision.

cheers
jenk.
jenk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2003, 9:26 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 430
Default

Quote:
Its a shame that manufactures datasheets don't give all the info needed - ie, the capacity of the nihm cells there using for comparision.
I whole heartedly agree.

Amazingly enough, however, the Sony DSC-U20 user manual devotes a whole page to battery life and the number of images that can be recorded. It lists tables for "average" shooting conditions, shooting continuously and viewing. These table include cycle times similar to what I suggested above and give battery life as a function of image size and with LCD on and off. A rather exemplary job on Sony's part if I might say so. Their data was relative to the (included) Sony brand batteries, but in reality the Sony batteries are just normal high quality NiMH AAAs (some reports indicate that Sony NiMHs are Sony badged batteries made by Sanyo). No matter, though, I've used the same capacity Kodak and Powerex NiMH bats with run-time performance that is nearly spot-on to that which Sony listed in their table.
jawz is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:25 PM.