Batteries

In article , Martin Brown
wrote:

It depends on the exact batteries purchased, but in many cases, the
rechargables won't last as long - per charge - as an alkaline battery.

nope. for a camera, nimh will almost always last much, much longer.

Rubbish. Single use fresh alkalines have both a higher unloaded terminal
voltage and a significantly higher Ah capacity to discharge. The only
problem is they are one time usage and so more expensive.

No. NiMH (or NiCd) have very high current rates (despite a lower
nominal voltage) than alkaline.

They have a lower internal resistance yes, but they also have a lower
unloaded terminal voltage and a higher energy density. It is the low
voltage that causes digital cameras logic to shut down prematurely
particularly once the thing tries to charge up its internal flash.

nimh batteries are very common and just about everything, especially
digital cameras, are designed to work with them.

the product would need to be a couple of decades old to have issues
with rechargeable batteries.

This is easily demonstrated on an accessory flash where with NiMH the
recycle time from a full power flash pulse is about 2.5 seconds but with
brand new alkaline it is 5 or 6 seconds. (guide number 56 - a "big"
flash). That shows the alkaline can't deliver the current even if their
open voltage is higher.

Alkaline don't deliver quite as high a current but only big flash guns
draw that sort of power when recharging and some cheap and nasty flash
guns can be destroyed by holding down the test flash button if you are
using rechargeables (NiCad or NiMH).

any flash recycles faster with nimh/nicad. even cheap ones and it would
nee to be a really old flash (multiple decades) to be damaged. i've
been using nimh/nicad in flashes for *years* without any issue
whatsoever.

I carry a pack of alkalines as backup, but my NiMH's always get me
through my sessions. My later NiMH's are eneloop - low (near 0) self
discharge.

I haven't used AA's as main batteries in a camera - so I won't speak to
that. Offhand, except for flash use, I'd expect alkaline to have more
endurance. On the other hand NiMH's have gotten pretty energy dense in
the last 10 years. And with Eneloop's the self discharge is very low
(zero for practical purposes).

But in a camera the single use secondary cell wins for lifetime because
it takes much longer to fall below the threshold low voltage safety
value. Some very low current consumer appliances won't work from NiMH at
all but will work quite happily from "spent" alkalines.

it's almost impossible to find something that will not work with a
rechargeable battery and the only reason 'spent alkalines' can work in
low current devices is because they draw low current. that's why
they're 'spent' in a typical device.

cameras are not low current devices, which is why alkalines don't last
that long in them and nimh does.

I do use alkaline in other devices with a low current demand, such as
GPS recorder on a long hike. These definitely last longer than the
NiMH's I have.

Right battery for the job.

Indeed. But digital cameras no longer take 2-3 amps like the original
DC-120 used to do. Alkalines will supply more Ah than any rechargable.

not for long. that's the problem. you get very short run time at high
current demands.

They can't quite match the peak current but a humble AA cell will still
deliver over 10A into a dead short. Enough to make thin wires red hot
pretty quickly. They can explode if provoked this way too.

which is a meaningless and irrelevant test.

On 5/2/2014 10:07 AM, nospam wrote:


any flash recycles faster with nimh/nicad. even cheap ones and it would
nee to be a really old flash (multiple decades) to be damaged. i've
been using nimh/nicad in flashes for *years* without any issue
whatsoever.


Which is why event photographers prefer the Nikon SB800 over the SB900.





--
PeterN

In article , PeterN
wrote:

any flash recycles faster with nimh/nicad. even cheap ones and it would
nee to be a really old flash (multiple decades) to be damaged. i've
been using nimh/nicad in flashes for *years* without any issue
whatsoever.

Which is why event photographers prefer the Nikon SB800 over the SB900.

no that's not why, and they don't.

both can use nimh or alkaline, so there's no issue either way, but the
sb900/910 has a faster recycle time, which event photographers desire.

the sb800 has long been discontinued so they don't have a choice
anymore anyway.

if they need even faster recycle times than aa batteries can provide,
they can get an external battery pack.

the sb800 had a 5th battery option for shorter recycle times, but that
was a complete hack and a very stupid idea. not only are nimh batteries
almost always sold in sets of 4, but when is the last time you saw a
battery charger that could charge 5 cells? there are 8 cell chargers
but those are big, bulky, more expensive and nowhere near as common.
also, many chargers charge pairs of batteries rather than single cells,
which means even if you do have an 8 cell charger (or multiple 4 cell
chargers), you're still screwed.

On 2014.05.02, 06:26 , Martin Brown wrote:
On 01/05/2014 22:44, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2014.05.01, 09:43 , Martin Brown wrote:
On 01/05/2014 14:09, nospam wrote:
In article , Scott Schuckert
wrote:

Man. My camera Canon A2000 goes through AA batteries like a dull
knife goes
through cheese. So yesterday, I purchased 4 rechargeable duracell
batteries
with a charger. Now, the question is: will these batts hold a
charge
longer
than the other non rechargeable batts? I hope so.

It depends on the exact batteries purchased, but in many cases, the
rechargables won't last as long - per charge - as an alkaline battery.

nope. for a camera, nimh will almost always last much, much longer.

Rubbish. Single use fresh alkalines have both a higher unloaded terminal
voltage and a significantly higher Ah capacity to discharge. The only
problem is they are one time usage and so more expensive.

No. NiMH (or NiCd) have very high current rates (despite a lower
nominal voltage) than alkaline.

They have a lower internal resistance yes, but they also have a lower
unloaded terminal voltage and a higher energy density. It is the low
voltage that causes digital cameras logic to shut down prematurely
particularly once the thing tries to charge up its internal flash.

As I said below I have never used AA's to power a camera so I don't
speak to that. You're right that the lower NiMH voltage could be an
issue with some cameras - but likely not all. Esp. these days as
digital logic devices run at ever lower voltage levels.


This is easily demonstrated on an accessory flash where with NiMH the
recycle time from a full power flash pulse is about 2.5 seconds but with
brand new alkaline it is 5 or 6 seconds. (guide number 56 - a "big"
flash). That shows the alkaline can't deliver the current even if their
open voltage is higher.

Alkaline don't deliver quite as high a current but only big flash guns
draw that sort of power when recharging and some cheap and nasty flash
guns can be destroyed by holding down the test flash button if you are
using rechargeables (NiCad or NiMH).

Regardless. If you go shooting with alkalines in your flash you will be
dead quick. NiMH are the best choice.

My flashes are not cheap and I rarely hit the test button, never mind
holding it down - but I'm sure it would not be an issue on my flashes as
the test button goes via the logic board and doesn't short the trigger
directly.

The flash has two "fire" pins, one is the traditional line that does
close the trigger circuit, the other is for programmed functions which
talks to the logic board which in turn closes the trigger per the
function (E-/TTL, strobe functions, wireless communication, etc.)


I carry a pack of alkalines as backup, but my NiMH's always get me
through my sessions. My later NiMH's are eneloop - low (near 0) self
discharge.

I haven't used AA's as main batteries in a camera - so I won't speak to
that. Offhand, except for flash use, I'd expect alkaline to have more
endurance. On the other hand NiMH's have gotten pretty energy dense in
the last 10 years. And with Eneloop's the self discharge is very low
(zero for practical purposes).

But in a camera the single use secondary cell wins for lifetime because
it takes much longer to fall below the threshold low voltage safety
value. Some very low current consumer appliances won't work from NiMH at
all but will work quite happily from "spent" alkalines.

I do use alkaline in other devices with a low current demand, such as
GPS recorder on a long hike. These definitely last longer than the
NiMH's I have.

Right battery for the job.

Indeed. But digital cameras no longer take 2-3 amps like the original
DC-120 used to do. Alkalines will supply more Ah than any rechargable.

Experience over time suggests to me that the "obvious" choice is
sometimes not the right choice depending on the actual equipment.


They can't quite match the peak current but a humble AA cell will still
deliver over 10A into a dead short. Enough to make thin wires red hot
pretty quickly. They can explode if provoked this way too.

What counts is what works with a given device. Saying "all" cameras
will only work well with alkalines is not likely to survive time.

Alkalines are not environmentally friendly, either. So perhaps with
lower voltage logic prevalent these days, cameras can be designed to
work very well with 2.4 or 4.8 rather than 3 or 6V. Again I have no
'backup' for what cameras can run well at lower voltage - but it's
certainly possible these days.

--
"Big data can reduce anything to a single number,
but you shouldn’t be fooled by the appearance of exactitude."
-Gary Marcus and Ernest Davis, NYT, 2014.04.07

On 5/2/2014 11:07 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

any flash recycles faster with nimh/nicad. even cheap ones and it would
nee to be a really old flash (multiple decades) to be damaged. i've
been using nimh/nicad in flashes for *years* without any issue
whatsoever.

Which is why event photographers prefer the Nikon SB800 over the SB900.

no that's not why, and they don't.

both can use nimh or alkaline, so there's no issue either way, but the
sb900/910 has a faster recycle time, which event photographers desire.

the sb800 has long been discontinued so they don't have a choice
anymore anyway.

if they need even faster recycle times than aa batteries can provide,
they can get an external battery pack.

the sb800 had a 5th battery option for shorter recycle times, but that
was a complete hack and a very stupid idea. not only are nimh batteries
almost always sold in sets of 4, but when is the last time you saw a
battery charger that could charge 5 cells? there are 8 cell chargers
but those are big, bulky, more expensive and nowhere near as common.
also, many chargers charge pairs of batteries rather than single cells,
which means even if you do have an 8 cell charger (or multiple 4 cell
chargers), you're still screwed.


All irrelevant.
The SB900 craps out sooner than the SB800, when a series of rapid
flashes is shot. That is why many professional event photographers will
pay a premium price for a used SB800.

--
PeterN

In article , PeterN
wrote:

any flash recycles faster with nimh/nicad. even cheap ones and it would
nee to be a really old flash (multiple decades) to be damaged. i've
been using nimh/nicad in flashes for *years* without any issue
whatsoever.

Which is why event photographers prefer the Nikon SB800 over the SB900.

no that's not why, and they don't.

both can use nimh or alkaline, so there's no issue either way, but the
sb900/910 has a faster recycle time, which event photographers desire.

the sb800 has long been discontinued so they don't have a choice
anymore anyway.

if they need even faster recycle times than aa batteries can provide,
they can get an external battery pack.

the sb800 had a 5th battery option for shorter recycle times, but that
was a complete hack and a very stupid idea. not only are nimh batteries
almost always sold in sets of 4, but when is the last time you saw a
battery charger that could charge 5 cells? there are 8 cell chargers
but those are big, bulky, more expensive and nowhere near as common.
also, many chargers charge pairs of batteries rather than single cells,
which means even if you do have an 8 cell charger (or multiple 4 cell
chargers), you're still screwed.

All irrelevant.

it's very relevant.

The SB900 craps out sooner than the SB800, when a series of rapid
flashes is shot.

that's because the sb900/sb910 have a temperature sensor to prevent it
from overheating, which is a good thing.

the difference is that the sb900 shuts down to cool, whereas the sb910
just slows down so you can still shoot, although it being slower might
be an issue, depending on the event.

the overheating issue affects the sb800 (and every other flash), it's
just that *you* are responsible for letting it cool. if you don't, then
you end up buying a replacement flash.

the sb800 owner's manual gives a relatively low number of flashes (as
few as 15 at higher power levels), at which point the flash should be
left to cool for 10 minutes, a long time for an event photographer.

That is why many professional event photographers will
pay a premium price for a used SB800.

only the stupid ones.

On 5/2/2014 12:07 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

any flash recycles faster with nimh/nicad. even cheap ones and it would
nee to be a really old flash (multiple decades) to be damaged. i've
been using nimh/nicad in flashes for *years* without any issue
whatsoever.

Which is why event photographers prefer the Nikon SB800 over the SB900.

no that's not why, and they don't.

both can use nimh or alkaline, so there's no issue either way, but the
sb900/910 has a faster recycle time, which event photographers desire.

the sb800 has long been discontinued so they don't have a choice
anymore anyway.

if they need even faster recycle times than aa batteries can provide,
they can get an external battery pack.

the sb800 had a 5th battery option for shorter recycle times, but that
was a complete hack and a very stupid idea. not only are nimh batteries
almost always sold in sets of 4, but when is the last time you saw a
battery charger that could charge 5 cells? there are 8 cell chargers
but those are big, bulky, more expensive and nowhere near as common.
also, many chargers charge pairs of batteries rather than single cells,
which means even if you do have an 8 cell charger (or multiple 4 cell
chargers), you're still screwed.

All irrelevant.

it's very relevant.

The SB900 craps out sooner than the SB800, when a series of rapid
flashes is shot.

that's because the sb900/sb910 have a temperature sensor to prevent it
from overheating, which is a good thing.

the difference is that the sb900 shuts down to cool, whereas the sb910
just slows down so you can still shoot, although it being slower might
be an issue, depending on the event.

the overheating issue affects the sb800 (and every other flash), it's
just that *you* are responsible for letting it cool. if you don't, then
you end up buying a replacement flash.

the sb800 owner's manual gives a relatively low number of flashes (as
few as 15 at higher power levels), at which point the flash should be
left to cool for 10 minutes, a long time for an event photographer.

That is why many professional event photographers will
pay a premium price for a used SB800.

only the stupid ones.


You must answer, even when you don't know what you are talking about.



--
PeterN

In article , PeterN
wrote:

any flash recycles faster with nimh/nicad. even cheap ones and it would
nee to be a really old flash (multiple decades) to be damaged. i've
been using nimh/nicad in flashes for *years* without any issue
whatsoever.

Which is why event photographers prefer the Nikon SB800 over the SB900.

no that's not why, and they don't.

both can use nimh or alkaline, so there's no issue either way, but the
sb900/910 has a faster recycle time, which event photographers desire.

the sb800 has long been discontinued so they don't have a choice
anymore anyway.

if they need even faster recycle times than aa batteries can provide,
they can get an external battery pack.

the sb800 had a 5th battery option for shorter recycle times, but that
was a complete hack and a very stupid idea. not only are nimh batteries
almost always sold in sets of 4, but when is the last time you saw a
battery charger that could charge 5 cells? there are 8 cell chargers
but those are big, bulky, more expensive and nowhere near as common.
also, many chargers charge pairs of batteries rather than single cells,
which means even if you do have an 8 cell charger (or multiple 4 cell
chargers), you're still screwed.

All irrelevant.

it's very relevant.

The SB900 craps out sooner than the SB800, when a series of rapid
flashes is shot.

that's because the sb900/sb910 have a temperature sensor to prevent it
from overheating, which is a good thing.

the difference is that the sb900 shuts down to cool, whereas the sb910
just slows down so you can still shoot, although it being slower might
be an issue, depending on the event.

the overheating issue affects the sb800 (and every other flash), it's
just that *you* are responsible for letting it cool. if you don't, then
you end up buying a replacement flash.

the sb800 owner's manual gives a relatively low number of flashes (as
few as 15 at higher power levels), at which point the flash should be
left to cool for 10 minutes, a long time for an event photographer.

That is why many professional event photographers will
pay a premium price for a used SB800.

only the stupid ones.

You must answer, even when you don't know what you are talking about.

another ad hominem response. no surprise there. that's all you ever do.

i know exactly what i'm talking about.

On 5/2/2014 12:59 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

any flash recycles faster with nimh/nicad. even cheap ones and it would
nee to be a really old flash (multiple decades) to be damaged. i've
been using nimh/nicad in flashes for *years* without any issue
whatsoever.

Which is why event photographers prefer the Nikon SB800 over the SB900.

no that's not why, and they don't.

both can use nimh or alkaline, so there's no issue either way, but the
sb900/910 has a faster recycle time, which event photographers desire.

the sb800 has long been discontinued so they don't have a choice
anymore anyway.

if they need even faster recycle times than aa batteries can provide,
they can get an external battery pack.

the sb800 had a 5th battery option for shorter recycle times, but that
was a complete hack and a very stupid idea. not only are nimh batteries
almost always sold in sets of 4, but when is the last time you saw a
battery charger that could charge 5 cells? there are 8 cell chargers
but those are big, bulky, more expensive and nowhere near as common.
also, many chargers charge pairs of batteries rather than single cells,
which means even if you do have an 8 cell charger (or multiple 4 cell
chargers), you're still screwed.

All irrelevant.

it's very relevant.

The SB900 craps out sooner than the SB800, when a series of rapid
flashes is shot.

that's because the sb900/sb910 have a temperature sensor to prevent it
from overheating, which is a good thing.

the difference is that the sb900 shuts down to cool, whereas the sb910
just slows down so you can still shoot, although it being slower might
be an issue, depending on the event.

the overheating issue affects the sb800 (and every other flash), it's
just that *you* are responsible for letting it cool. if you don't, then
you end up buying a replacement flash.

the sb800 owner's manual gives a relatively low number of flashes (as
few as 15 at higher power levels), at which point the flash should be
left to cool for 10 minutes, a long time for an event photographer.

That is why many professional event photographers will
pay a premium price for a used SB800.

only the stupid ones.

You must answer, even when you don't know what you are talking about.

another ad hominem response. no surprise there. that's all you ever do.

i know exactly what i'm talking about.

Not according to the reports about the SC900.


--
PeterN

In article , PeterN
wrote:

any flash recycles faster with nimh/nicad. even cheap ones and it
would
nee to be a really old flash (multiple decades) to be damaged. i've
been using nimh/nicad in flashes for *years* without any issue
whatsoever.

Which is why event photographers prefer the Nikon SB800 over the SB900.

no that's not why, and they don't.

both can use nimh or alkaline, so there's no issue either way, but the
sb900/910 has a faster recycle time, which event photographers desire.

the sb800 has long been discontinued so they don't have a choice
anymore anyway.

if they need even faster recycle times than aa batteries can provide,
they can get an external battery pack.

the sb800 had a 5th battery option for shorter recycle times, but that
was a complete hack and a very stupid idea. not only are nimh batteries
almost always sold in sets of 4, but when is the last time you saw a
battery charger that could charge 5 cells? there are 8 cell chargers
but those are big, bulky, more expensive and nowhere near as common.
also, many chargers charge pairs of batteries rather than single cells,
which means even if you do have an 8 cell charger (or multiple 4 cell
chargers), you're still screwed.

All irrelevant.

it's very relevant.

The SB900 craps out sooner than the SB800, when a series of rapid
flashes is shot.

that's because the sb900/sb910 have a temperature sensor to prevent it
from overheating, which is a good thing.

the difference is that the sb900 shuts down to cool, whereas the sb910
just slows down so you can still shoot, although it being slower might
be an issue, depending on the event.

the overheating issue affects the sb800 (and every other flash), it's
just that *you* are responsible for letting it cool. if you don't, then
you end up buying a replacement flash.

the sb800 owner's manual gives a relatively low number of flashes (as
few as 15 at higher power levels), at which point the flash should be
left to cool for 10 minutes, a long time for an event photographer.

That is why many professional event photographers will
pay a premium price for a used SB800.

only the stupid ones.

You must answer, even when you don't know what you are talking about.

another ad hominem response. no surprise there. that's all you ever do.

i know exactly what i'm talking about.

Not according to the reports about the SC900.

so you don't actually use one for event photography, do you? no
surprise there either.

first of all, the sb900 (not sc) has been replaced with the sb910 and
second, as i said, the temperature sensor is to protect it from burning
out, something which could easily happen in other flashes.

nikon made a small change with the sb910 so that instead of completely
shutting down, it just slows down. the issue you are talking about is
no longer an issue (not that it was a major issue before, just
something to be aware of).

any event photographer that is shooting rapid fire flashes would have a
spare flash anyway because they can overheat, something that affects
every single flash out there.