If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Better check that math again, Alfred. The Canon battery is 7.4v, not 1.2v.
So the available power is 7.4 x 1350 (typical rating of a generic BP-511 battery) = 9990 (or 99.9 watts). Each of your AA Nimh cells is 1.2 x 2300 = 2300, so four would be 2300 x 4 or 9200 (or 92 watts). So they are actually about the same. Then there's the question of how much power each camera uses, which would be a much better guide to determining which will last longer. I have no experience with the Olympus, but I can say that two BP-511's in the grip of my 10D powered it for my entire vacation (10 days) a couple of weeks ago. Tom P. "Alfred Molon" wrote in message news.com... In article , says... Both are very capable cameras. While 5050 includes charger and batteries, G3 charge in camera and its battery life is far longer than 4 nihm AA. Not really. A set of four 2200 mAh NiMH has more energy than the G3 battery and will last for over 300 shots (with the LCD on). -- Alfred Molon |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Sorry, you're right about the power of 10, I was tihnking milli = 100, too
early for me, I guess. But since you didn't use Olympus brand batteries, I didn't use Canon. Like you, I chose a generic with more power. The Canon is ~1150 maH, IIRC, many of the generics are 1350, like your third-party 2300 maH generics. Bottom line, mine's still bigger than yours At least until the 2500 maH AA cells come out in a few months. Tom P. "Alfred Molon" wrote in message news.com... Perhaps you should check your math, Tom. First of all you are off by one power of ten: 1.2V x 2.3 Ah x 4 = 9.2 Wh, not 92 Wh The Canon battery (BP-511) has an energy of 8.1 Wh. See he http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong3/page11.asp In article , says... Better check that math again, Alfred. The Canon battery is 7.4v, not 1.2v. So the available power is 7.4 x 1350 (typical rating of a generic BP-511 battery) = 9990 (or 99.9 watts). Each of your AA Nimh cells is 1.2 x 2300 = 2300, so four would be 2300 x 4 or 9200 (or 92 watts). So they are actually about the same. Then there's the question of how much power each camera uses, which would be a much better guide to determining which will last longer. I have no experience with the Olympus, but I can say that two BP-511's in the grip of my 10D powered it for my entire vacation (10 days) a couple of weeks ago. Tom P. "Alfred Molon" wrote in message news.com... In article , says... Both are very capable cameras. While 5050 includes charger and batteries, G3 charge in camera and its battery life is far longer than 4 nihm AA. Not really. A set of four 2200 mAh NiMH has more energy than the G3 battery and will last for over 300 shots (with the LCD on). -- Alfred Molon -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus4040_5050/ Olympus 4040 resource - http://www.molon.de/4040.html Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
By the way, looks like math tonight really went bathing:
4 x 1.2V x 2.3 Ah = 11.04 Wh for the NiMH 7.4V * 1.35 Ah = 9.99 Wh for the LiIon The NimH batteries already have more power than the LiIon battery. In article , says... Sorry, you're right about the power of 10, I was tihnking milli = 100, too early for me, I guess. But since you didn't use Olympus brand batteries, I didn't use Canon. Like you, I chose a generic with more power. The Canon is ~1150 maH, IIRC, many of the generics are 1350, like your third-party 2300 maH generics. Bottom line, mine's still bigger than yours At least until the 2500 maH AA cells come out in a few months. Tom P. "Alfred Molon" wrote in message news.com... Perhaps you should check your math, Tom. First of all you are off by one power of ten: 1.2V x 2.3 Ah x 4 = 9.2 Wh, not 92 Wh The Canon battery (BP-511) has an energy of 8.1 Wh. See he http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong3/page11.asp In article , says... Better check that math again, Alfred. The Canon battery is 7.4v, not 1.2v. So the available power is 7.4 x 1350 (typical rating of a generic BP-511 battery) = 9990 (or 99.9 watts). Each of your AA Nimh cells is 1.2 x 2300 = 2300, so four would be 2300 x 4 or 9200 (or 92 watts). So they are actually about the same. Then there's the question of how much power each camera uses, which would be a much better guide to determining which will last longer. I have no experience with the Olympus, but I can say that two BP-511's in the grip of my 10D powered it for my entire vacation (10 days) a couple of weeks ago. Tom P. "Alfred Molon" wrote in message news.com... In article , says... Both are very capable cameras. While 5050 includes charger and batteries, G3 charge in camera and its battery life is far longer than 4 nihm AA. Not really. A set of four 2200 mAh NiMH has more energy than the G3 battery and will last for over 300 shots (with the LCD on). -- Alfred Molon -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus4040_5050/ Olympus 4040 resource - http://www.molon.de/4040.html Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus4040_5050/ Olympus 4040 resource - http://www.molon.de/4040.html Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Ack! You mean 2300 x 1.2 isn't 2300? Dang I hate math! You're right once
again, but perhaps we agree that the difference isn't as great as once thought. The BP-511 is the winner on power/oz, though. It weighs 2.5 ounces, compared to 3.8 for a set of AA's. Tom P. "Alfred Molon" wrote in message news.com... By the way, looks like math tonight really went bathing: 4 x 1.2V x 2.3 Ah = 11.04 Wh for the NiMH 7.4V * 1.35 Ah = 9.99 Wh for the LiIon The NimH batteries already have more power than the LiIon battery. In article , says... Sorry, you're right about the power of 10, I was tihnking milli = 100, too early for me, I guess. But since you didn't use Olympus brand batteries, I didn't use Canon. Like you, I chose a generic with more power. The Canon is ~1150 maH, IIRC, many of the generics are 1350, like your third-party 2300 maH generics. Bottom line, mine's still bigger than yours At least until the 2500 maH AA cells come out in a few months. Tom P. "Alfred Molon" wrote in message news.com... Perhaps you should check your math, Tom. First of all you are off by one power of ten: 1.2V x 2.3 Ah x 4 = 9.2 Wh, not 92 Wh The Canon battery (BP-511) has an energy of 8.1 Wh. See he http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong3/page11.asp In article , says... Better check that math again, Alfred. The Canon battery is 7.4v, not 1.2v. So the available power is 7.4 x 1350 (typical rating of a generic BP-511 battery) = 9990 (or 99.9 watts). Each of your AA Nimh cells is 1.2 x 2300 = 2300, so four would be 2300 x 4 or 9200 (or 92 watts). So they are actually about the same. Then there's the question of how much power each camera uses, which would be a much better guide to determining which will last longer. I have no experience with the Olympus, but I can say that two BP-511's in the grip of my 10D powered it for my entire vacation (10 days) a couple of weeks ago. Tom P. "Alfred Molon" wrote in message news.com... In article , says... Both are very capable cameras. While 5050 includes charger and batteries, G3 charge in camera and its battery life is far longer than 4 nihm AA. Not really. A set of four 2200 mAh NiMH has more energy than the G3 battery and will last for over 300 shots (with the LCD on). -- Alfred Molon -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus4040_5050/ Olympus 4040 resource - http://www.molon.de/4040.html Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus4040_5050/ Olympus 4040 resource - http://www.molon.de/4040.html Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
But which has the prettiest color...?
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 20:33:44 -0500, "Tom Pfeiffer" wrote: Ack! You mean 2300 x 1.2 isn't 2300? Dang I hate math! You're right once again, but perhaps we agree that the difference isn't as great as once thought. The BP-511 is the winner on power/oz, though. It weighs 2.5 ounces, compared to 3.8 for a set of AA's. Tom P. "Alfred Molon" wrote in message tnews.com... By the way, looks like math tonight really went bathing: 4 x 1.2V x 2.3 Ah = 11.04 Wh for the NiMH 7.4V * 1.35 Ah = 9.99 Wh for the LiIon The NimH batteries already have more power than the LiIon battery. In article , says... Sorry, you're right about the power of 10, I was tihnking milli = 100, too early for me, I guess. But since you didn't use Olympus brand batteries, I didn't use Canon. Like you, I chose a generic with more power. The Canon is ~1150 maH, IIRC, many of the generics are 1350, like your third-party 2300 maH generics. Bottom line, mine's still bigger than yours At least until the 2500 maH AA cells come out in a few months. Tom P. "Alfred Molon" wrote in message news.com... Perhaps you should check your math, Tom. First of all you are off by one power of ten: 1.2V x 2.3 Ah x 4 = 9.2 Wh, not 92 Wh The Canon battery (BP-511) has an energy of 8.1 Wh. See he http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong3/page11.asp In article , says... Better check that math again, Alfred. The Canon battery is 7.4v, not 1.2v. So the available power is 7.4 x 1350 (typical rating of a generic BP-511 battery) = 9990 (or 99.9 watts). Each of your AA Nimh cells is 1.2 x 2300 = 2300, so four would be 2300 x 4 or 9200 (or 92 watts). So they are actually about the same. Then there's the question of how much power each camera uses, which would be a much better guide to determining which will last longer. I have no experience with the Olympus, but I can say that two BP-511's in the grip of my 10D powered it for my entire vacation (10 days) a couple of weeks ago. Tom P. "Alfred Molon" wrote in message news.com... In article , says... Both are very capable cameras. While 5050 includes charger and batteries, G3 charge in camera and its battery life is far longer than 4 nihm AA. Not really. A set of four 2200 mAh NiMH has more energy than the G3 battery and will last for over 300 shots (with the LCD on). -- Alfred Molon -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus4040_5050/ Olympus 4040 resource - http://www.molon.de/4040.html Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus4040_5050/ Olympus 4040 resource - http://www.molon.de/4040.html Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Put your nimh idle for 2 weeks and then check how much power it has left,
and do the same with BP-511, you will see the difference. Then there is charging time for flashes, memory effect, how accurate camera can detect the power level left in batteries. Nihm may be cheaper, but defenitely not the top performer. "Alfred Molon" wrote in message news.com... In article , says... Both are very capable cameras. While 5050 includes charger and batteries, G3 charge in camera and its battery life is far longer than 4 nihm AA. Not really. A set of four 2200 mAh NiMH has more energy than the G3 battery and will last for over 300 shots (with the LCD on). -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus4040_5050/ Olympus 4040 resource - http://www.molon.de/4040.html Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote in message .com... Actually, I find myself wanting a wider lens more often than not. OK, I *want* both, but I really *need* the wider-angle. With 5 megapixels, you can always crop to get what you want (particularly for web work, which is where most of it goes), but the wider wide-angle would make it that much more difficult to miss a shot, especially when you manage to get up-close-and-personal with the athlete but against a spectacular backdrop, as was the case at the top of the Tourmalet during the Tour de France http://www.ChainReaction.com/france0....htm#tourmalet --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles http://www.ChainReactionBicycles.com I think that is a good shot already. A wider angle won't neccesarily make that shot better. If you want wide angle shots, the wide converter from Olympus is a great one, worth the extra $, compared with $50-$60 third party products. Or you can shoot two or more pictures and stitch them together using various software. Just avoid any moving objects (such as bikers) in the overlapping areas. Such as this one here, stitched from 4 shots, taken with a C3020. http://myfilelocker.comcast.net/cano...mpus/index.htm |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
I think that is a good shot already. A wider angle won't neccesarily make
that shot better. If you want wide angle shots, the wide converter from Olympus is a great one, worth the extra $, compared with $50-$60 third party products. Or you can shoot two or more pictures and stitch them together using various software. Just avoid any moving objects (such as bikers) in the overlapping areas. Such as this one here, stitched from 4 shots, taken with a C3020. http://myfilelocker.comcast.net/cano...mpus/index.htm Sorry, didn't mean to imply that I needed a wider lens for *that* particular shot. I was able to do pretty well within the confines of the lens while I was up there (on Tourmalet). Cool stitched shot on your website. One of the things I forgot to bring with me was my mini-tripod (which would have helped with such shots). --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles http://www.ChainReactionBicycles.com "Q. Lu" wrote in message news "Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote in message .com... Actually, I find myself wanting a wider lens more often than not. OK, I *want* both, but I really *need* the wider-angle. With 5 megapixels, you can always crop to get what you want (particularly for web work, which is where most of it goes), but the wider wide-angle would make it that much more difficult to miss a shot, especially when you manage to get up-close-and-personal with the athlete but against a spectacular backdrop, as was the case at the top of the Tourmalet during the Tour de France http://www.ChainReaction.com/france0....htm#tourmalet --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles http://www.ChainReactionBicycles.com I think that is a good shot already. A wider angle won't neccesarily make that shot better. If you want wide angle shots, the wide converter from Olympus is a great one, worth the extra $, compared with $50-$60 third party products. Or you can shoot two or more pictures and stitch them together using various software. Just avoid any moving objects (such as bikers) in the overlapping areas. Such as this one here, stitched from 4 shots, taken with a C3020. http://myfilelocker.comcast.net/cano...mpus/index.htm |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote in message igy.com...
The noise issue hasn't been a problem for me; I set the camera to a -3 sharpness setting and do any needed sharpening (which isn't generally needed) later on. What do you have the other settings (saturation and contrast) set to? Thanks, Dave |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Olympus Refurb camera hell... suggestions? | Cynthia P | Digital Photography | 51 | January 5th 05 09:53 PM |
Olympus C8080 or Panasonic DMC-FZ20? | Tom Nakashima | Digital Photography | 0 | December 6th 04 03:47 PM |
FS: Olympus OM4T pro system | Andy Rothman | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | October 19th 04 01:49 AM |
Little review of the Olympus RC | Mike Henley | 35mm Photo Equipment | 5 | July 2nd 04 04:42 AM |
Olympus OM-1 with flash (and an extra camera) for sale on ebay | Taz Gregory | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 0 | June 1st 04 05:46 PM |