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 |
#171
|
|||
|
|||
Modern Nikon D-SLR camera that takes standard AA batteries
On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 09:33:19 -0700, SMS, whose motto appears to be
"See no truth, hear no truth, speak no truth" wrote: Name somebody who takes that claim seriously. Well of course I don't think anyone takes it seriously other than the people that actually say it. You can say that about a lot of posts on Usenet, like every post from ASAAR. Not all of my posts are intended to be taken seriously. If you want to believe, though, that none of my posts can be taken seriously then you're either a fool, or more likely, that because you've been caught yet again mixing a blend of biased, bogus and deceptive statements, it's getting to you. And all you can do is lash out with a baseless personal attack. But going by what I see in messages posted in this newsgroup, far more people not only don't take *you* seriously, but question your honesty as well. By now, this question has been answered. You're going to have to help me out here. The "middle of nowhere" argument refers to what, exactly? The argument that refers to nothing familiar is the weakest one of all, since it has no meaning to the reader. It's the claim that AA batteries are better because if you're ever stuck somewhere out in the wilderness with a discharged battery, you can find a general store that will have AA alkaline batteries for sale. I can't recall anyone that has claimed that it makes AA batteries better. It's just one of the minor advantages that AA batteries provide, and is of more value to some people than it obviously is to you. For some as yet unknown reason, you find this to be troubling. Until then, your claim that the lower self-discharge rate of Li-ion batteries is always an advantage for every application is dishonest. It's totally honest, and you know it. That's why you're so defensive about it. It's false, and I gave examples showing several cases backing this up. But since you use a kill file you wouldn't easily get to see it. How convenient for you. To repeat, at least for others, one case is when batteries are used so heavily that they need to be recharged more frequently than every 2 or 3 weeks. Under that condition, the higher self-discharge rate of NiMH batteries is a non-issue, and Li-Ion's lower self-discharge rate confers no advantage. Another case is where the owner rarely uses the camera. Some years maybe once or twice, other years not at all. I know a good number of people that use their cameras this way. For them, even though Li-Ion batteries have a low self-discharge rate, they'd still have to be put on the charger 2 or 3 times per year. Primary AA batteries (alkaline and lithium) have extremely long self-discharge rates, far lower than Li-Ion. It's also known as shelf life, and is about 8 years for alkalines and 16 years for lithium. Due to using a different chemistry, all of the other primary "photo" lithium batteries I've seen so far other than AA and AAA cells have shorter shelf lives, comparable to alkalines, about 8 years. Now you know. Or would if you could, that is. Steve. There are a lot of people for whom using AA NiMH batteries is not a hassle. They willingly deal with the hassle, but it's still a hassle. There's critical thinking and SMS's thought processes, and never the twain shall meet. For those folks, the way out is to buy yet another charger that handles most of their batteries. I hope you'll forgive me for suggesting that people who are not yet trapped like that might not see the situation you propose as advantageous. You fail to understand that for most folks there is no way out of that "trap." If you want a cell phone, Li-Ion is the only choice. If you want a camcorder, Li-Ion is the only choice. If you want a notebook computer, Li-Ion is the only choice, etc., etc.. Isn't it fortunate that with digital cameras, there actually *are* other choices? You may not think so, but I do . . . What you need to do is to simplify your life as best you can. For lower power devics, a mini-USB charger connection would be ideal, and this is what's used on some devices, but it isn't practical on high power devices. Once you realize that the difference between most Li-Ion batteries is only their physical dimensions and contact placement, a universal charger is easy. Lenmar did it with adapter plates, Maha did it with moveable contacts. Both can charge AA cells, as well as nearly every Li-Ion battery with accessible contacts. The Maha can charge 1, 2, 3, & 4 cell Li-Ion batteries (3.7, 7.4, 11.1, & 14.8V), while the Lenmar can charge only 1 & 2 cell. You could use the Maha for a notebook computer battery, though usually it's difficult to get to the contacts on such a battery. I suppose someone should welcome you to the Brave New World of "chipped" Li-Ion batteries. It's only a matter of time before not only will devices reject the use of unauthorized batteries, but smart, DRM-enabled batteries will not allow themselves to be charged in unauthorized chargers. g |
#172
|
|||
|
|||
Modern Nikon D-SLR camera that takes standard AA batteries
1,3,4,9 are true.
Point 2: A Li-ion battery actually has lower cycle life than Nimh cells. (300) Regarding the amount of energy, actually it's quite simple. From your words I believe you are refering to the voltage per cell of the NiMH which is lower (1.2v) than Li-Ion (3.6/3.7v). You should compare them using watt-hours. Multiply the voltage of the battery pack with the capacity in Amp hours and you'll get the figure. For example a Li-ion cell with 3.7v, 650mAh will have 3.7 x 0.65 = 2.4 Watt hours. Do the same with the NiMH cells and multiply the voltage with capacity. For more info visit www.batteryuniversity.com to learn all you need about batteries. Amanda Williams wrote: On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 15:07:55 -0700, SMS wrote: I suggest that you read http://batterydata.com Li-Ion rechargeable batteries have the following advantages 1. Lower self-discharge 2. Higher number of cycles 3. Higher energy density 4. Better low-temperature performance 5. Comparable cost 6. Universal Li-Ion chargers 7. Protection circuitry integral to the battery 8. Accurate charge level indicator 9. Lower maintenance. 10. Higher-end cameras use Li-Ion batteries. This is seemingly good information ... until you look analytically. Let's pick one or two or three of your points above to see if these arguments actually hold any water for this discussion of the Nikon D50 D-SLR. I am particularly interested in item number 6. Where can I find this "Universal Li-Ion Charger" that will not only charge my Nikon EN-EL3a but also my Nikon Coolpix 5000 EN-EL1 and my JVC GR-DVL820U ER-C620 battery? If your statement is even partially true, it would be a breakthrough in battery technology of the order I was suggesting (i.e., universal USB chargers). Likewise with the higher energy density. Why is it that six very small and lightweight AA batteries have about the same energy as two much larger and heavier Nikon EN-EL3a batteries? And, how is there "lower maintenance" for a sealed Li-Ion battery pack (where the reverse polarity of just one cell cannot be resolved without breaking the battery pack open and unsoldering the connections) vs the perfectly reasonable replacement of a bad cell in AA technology (not counting the fact that reverse polarity rarely occurs with AA cells because they are constantly switched about in different orders with each use). Can you explain these three anomolies? - Where is this universal Li-Ion charger you bespeak of? - Why doesn't our math support your higher-density argument? - How can a sealed pack where one dead cell kills all give you lower maintenance? Please advise, TIA, Amanda W. |
#173
|
|||
|
|||
Modern Nikon D-SLR camera that takes standard AA batteries
|
#174
|
|||
|
|||
Modern Nikon D-SLR camera that takes standard AA batteries
On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 02:56:44 -0700, SMS the Li-Ion shill wrote:
Point 2: A Li-ion battery actually has lower cycle life than Nimh cells. (300) A NiMH battery degrades after 200-300 cycles (capacity is reduced after that). A Li-ion battery provides 300 to 500 discharge/charge cycles or two to three years of service from the time of manufacturing, with very little degradation. Wrong, and as usual, misleading. Information from www.energizer.com indicates that *ALL* rechargeable batteries deteriorate with age (NiMH is no exception), but it's far slower with NiMH, which can even be stored unused for five years before being put into service. Li-Ion batteries would be of little use long before that point is reached. By showing "200-300" near NiMH and "300 to 500" near Li-Ion you give the false impression that Li-Ion batteries provide more recharge cycles than NiMH batteries. In fact, the opposite is true. Different manufacturers claim that NiMH batteries are designed to permit from 500 to 1000 recharge cycles. RayOVac says that theirs can be recharged 500 times. End-of-life is considered to be when the battery capacity has declined to 80% of the original capacity. If you don't mind this reduced capacity, you can continue using your old NiMH cells well beyond this point. It would be possible to say that "A Li-Ion battery degrades after 20-30 cycles (capacity is reduced after that)" and it would be just as incorrect and/or misleading as the similar statement that you made about NiMH batteries. Where do you come up with this stuff? As far as your optimistic "300 to 500 discharge/charge cycles or two to three years of service" for Li-Ion batteries is concerned, many iPod owners that have had to replace their batteries during the first year of operation might take issue with your claim. |
#175
|
|||
|
|||
Modern Nikon D-SLR camera that takes standard AA batteries
On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 09:33:19 -0700
SMS wrote: Paul Allen wrote: Name somebody who takes that claim seriously. Well of course I don't think anyone takes it seriously other than the people that actually say it. You can say that about a lot of posts on Usenet, like every post from ASAAR. (The claim being referred to is that some people think Li-ion batteries are a conspiracy by camera makers.) The only poster I've seen calling people who prefer AA batteries conspiracy theorists is you. I rest my case. (I don't see the recent development of chipped batteries as conspiracy, but rather as unilateral attempts by individual camera makers to lock customers in.) You're going to have to help me out here. The "middle of nowhere" argument refers to what, exactly? The argument that refers to nothing familiar is the weakest one of all, since it has no meaning to the reader. It's the claim that AA batteries are better because if you're ever stuck somewhere out in the wilderness with a discharged battery, you can find a general store that will have AA alkaline batteries for sale. I guess your world is all black and white, huh? The ability to find spare batteries in odd places actually is a small advantage. That's simply a true statement. Characterizing the argument as "AA batteries are better because you can find them everywhere" is dishonest. For point and shoot cameras, it's an extremely common usage model to use the camera only occasionally. Sez you. Back it up with data and we can talk about who uses cameras for what. Cute. I take it you don't have a response? Until then, your claim that the lower self-discharge rate of Li-ion batteries is always an advantage for every application is dishonest. It's totally honest, and you know it. That's why you're so defensive about it. Ummm, right. The hole you're in is getting deeper. The way out is to actually think about what you're saying. You're getting so close to admitting the truth here, but still using language like "hassle" and "might be acceptable". In fact, I say this exact thing on the web site. Consistent dishonesty. How nice. Tell the truth, Steve. There are a lot of people for whom using AA NiMH batteries is not a hassle. They willingly deal with the hassle, but it's still a hassle. You hear that everybody? Steve has just declared that using AA NiMH batteries is officially a hassle. It doesn't matter what you think. Steve has spoken! What a crock. You'd have to buy an AA charger anyway, as most AA cameras don't come with them. Dishonest, Steve. AA rechargeables are common, so many people already have a charger that will serve. Wait, didn't they have to buy that charger at some point? That was band-aid solution, LOL. Dishonest, Steve. It is irrelevant that the dusty AA charger in the closet was purchased at some point. The point is that adding a new proprietary battery to the mix forces the purchase of yet another charger if one wants one charger to charge them all. Yes There are people who have become trapped by the "every device I own has a different proprietary battery" syndrome. Well gee, show us all a cellular phone, or a camcorder, or a PDA, or a notebook PC, that still uses AA batteries. You might find a low end PDA, but nothing else. The ubiquitous nature of li-ion batteries is irrelevant. AA batteries still work fine in many applications. Simply admit that, and a lot of this push-back stops. For those folks, the way out is to buy yet another charger that handles most of their batteries. I hope you'll forgive me for suggesting that people who are not yet trapped like that might not see the situation you propose as advantageous. You fail to understand that for most folks there is no way out of that "trap." If you want a cell phone, Li-Ion is the only choice. If you want a camcorder, Li-Ion is the only choice. If you want a notebook computer, Li-Ion is the only choice, etc., etc.. Relative unavoidability does not change the nature of the trap or mean that I should prefer being trapped. Paul Allen |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NIKON USA--TERRIBLE SERVICE EXPERIENCE. | Aguilabrava | 35mm Photo Equipment | 134 | December 17th 04 04:00 AM |
FS: 8 Nikon lenses including 80-200 Nikkor 2.8 zoom and accessories | Henry Peña | General Equipment For Sale | 2 | November 12th 03 02:56 PM |
FS: 8 Nikon lenses including 80-200 Nikkor 2.8 zoom and accessories | Henry Peña | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | November 11th 03 06:20 PM |
FS: Nikon N50 Autofocus Camera Kit | Phil Tobias | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | August 30th 03 03:43 AM |