Professional Web Applications Themes

Proprietary Battery Rant - Photography

"mike" <com> wrote in message news:com...    Says it all really. Do you expect your TV to last 40 years as well? You can get color these days! The world moves on yet there are some who hang onto the past with the grip of a dying man. Kenny (30+ years in photography)...

  1. #21

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant


    "mike" <com> wrote in message
    news:com... 
     

    Says it all really. Do you expect your TV to last 40 years as well? You
    can get color these days!

    The world moves on yet there are some who hang onto the past with the
    grip of a dying man.

    Kenny (30+ years in photography)


    Kenny Guest

  2. #22

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant

    I never made any such statement. Somebody has his attributions wrong.

    ---Bob Gross---

     

    >
    >Says it all really. Do you expect your TV to last 40 years as well? You
    >can get color these days!
    >
    >The world moves on yet there are some who hang onto the past with the
    >grip of a dying man.
    >
    >Kenny (30+ years in photography)[/ref]

    Robertwgross Guest

  3. #23

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant

    >20 AAs, as in 5 sets of 4 AAs. Is this Alkaline or Lithium? If you mean 

    I guess it all depends on your use. The way I was shooting with my
    old Canon A20, before I made the switch to NiMH, a set of 4 alkaline
    AA's would generally last me about 2 to 3 weeks before I needed to
    replace them.
    Paul Guest

  4. #24

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant

    Ken Zenachon <com> wrote in
    news:com:
     

    So what do you want? Are you being too particular? There are a lot of
    cameras that use 2, 3 or 4 AA NiMH cells. Likewise, there are cameras
    which accept remote battery packs (or can be modified to do so). You can
    use anything, including lead-acid cells, then.

    Personally, one of my reasons for choosing my current camera was that it
    had to use AA cells. Anything else was unacceptable. I was even prepared
    to sacrifice a little picture quality for it! (There were several other
    reasons for my choice though!).

    --
    Mick
    http://www.nascom.info for Nascom & Gemini info.
    Also at http://www.mixtel.co.uk
    Return email address is munged.
    Form@C Guest

  5. #25

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant

    FormC wrote: 
    >
    >
    > So what do you want? Are you being too particular? There are a lot of
    > cameras that use 2, 3 or 4 AA NiMH cells. Likewise, there are cameras
    > which accept remote battery packs (or can be modified to do so). You can
    > use anything, including lead-acid cells, then.
    >
    > Personally, one of my reasons for choosing my current camera was that it
    > had to use AA cells. Anything else was unacceptable. I was even prepared
    > to sacrifice a little picture quality for it! (There were several other
    > reasons for my choice though!).
    >[/ref]

    There are a number of benefits to the Lithium Ion batteries, but can't
    there be a STANDARD which various companies can adopt? I don't
    understand why we can't have the best of both worlds, standards, and
    Lithium Ion batteries, BOTH.


    Ron Guest

  6. #26

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant

    Robertwgross wrote: 
    > > [/ref][/ref]



    No, it does not say that _you_ (Robertwgross) said anything at all.
    You might want to pay a little more attention to the detials of
    the attributions yourself. They are correct as posted.



    Bob
    --
    Bob Guest

  7. #27

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant

    Bob wrote: 

    No, I can't do anything about detials. The details, however, show there is no
    intervening name for the statement, so it makes it appear that I made the
    statement, which I obviously did not. So, they are not correct as in your post.

    ---Bob Gross---
    Robertwgross Guest

  8. #28

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant

    Robertwgross wrote: 
    >
    > No, I can't do anything about detials. The details, however, show there is no
    > intervening name for the statement, so it makes it appear that I made the
    > statement, which I obviously did not. So, they are not correct as in your post.[/ref]


    They are entirely correct.

    There is an extraneous attribution line, with NO quotations associated.
    One need only count the number of attribution characters (">") at the
    beginning of each line to see it.


    Bob
    Bob Guest

  9. #29

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant



    Ken Zenachon wrote:
     

    They make sense to camera makers. Selling spare batteries is probably
    very profitable, and if cameras are very durable, they can make consumers
    buy new cameras buying batteries for their existing cameras no longer
    available, or very high priced.
     

    The other choice is what Nikon does with some models. Make you pay
    around $150? for a plastic case that holds AA batteries and attaches to the
    camera.
     

    JK Guest

  10. #30

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant



    Bob O`Bob wrote:
     
    > >
    > > Most of the Olympus cameras sold over the past few years come with those
    > > proprietary Lithium cell "packs" but also take standard AA alkaline, NiCad
    > > and NiMH cells.
    > >
    > > All of the 3000, 4000, 5000 and 700 series will operate on AA batteries.[/ref]
    >
    > even those lithium cell packs (CR-V3) are NOT proprietary[/ref]

    They are expensive though, and not rechargeable.


    JK Guest

  11. #31

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant

    Progress would be a rechargeable battery at a lower price that holds
    more power, not a battery at a much higher price. nimh rechargeables
    offer great value.

    Phil Stripling wrote:
     
    >
    > Well, I'm with you on that point, Ken. Louise bought me a Nikon CoolPix
    > based on two requirements of mine: a viewfinder in addition to the LCD and
    > AAs. I have two sets of 4 rechargeable AAs that I use in it when possible,
    > but we often camp in sites without electricity for long enough to run the
    > batteries down, so having a bag of regular non-rechargeable batteries saves
    > the day, plus providing power to our AA-burning flashlights, fans, radios,
    > GPS, and assorted toys and goodies. AAs are goooooood.
    >
    > However, the battery industry is making great strides in packing more power
    > into NiMHs and LiIons, and the camera makers are incorporating those
    > batteries into cameras with appropriate shapes to take up less space and to
    > be more compact in the smaller cameras, so I'm conceding the AA issue. It's
    > a lost cause. The new batteries have proprietary shapes and voltages and
    > chargers because the chargers contain sensing devices that will properly
    > charge and care for the batteries, making them last much longer at higher
    > power than the old carbon-rod batteries of my youth and than the alkalines
    > and copper tops, and so on and on.
    >
    > Progress, hon. Look at it as progress. We've started packing a 21 Amp/hour
    > gel cell with inverter and a multi-strip outlet for all the proprietary
    > recharging units for the non-AA stuff we are carrying more of these days.
    >
    > Remember, progress and a good margarita will get you a buzz on. Just be
    > sure to make them both straight up and with salt.
    > --
    > Philip Stripling | email to the replyto address is presumed
    > Legal Assistance on the Web | spam and read later. email to philip
    > http://www.PhilipStripling.com/ | my domain is read daily.[/ref]

    JK Guest

  12. #32

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant

    Are they so good? I would be willing to forgo the zoom if I could
    get a medium focal length (50mm equivalent) lens that is fast.
    Why can't anyone design a shirt pocket sized camera with an
    f2 lens, or one with an f2.8 lens and a very low noise 800 ISO
    or 1600 ISO mode? The current shirt pocket sized digital cameras
    make it very difficult to take decent photos indoors most of the time
    without using a flash or tripod.

    J wrote:
     
    > >
    > > For the laptop, and for the flash, and for the other flash, and for
    > > the digital camera, and for the other digital camera, and for the cell
    > > phone, and for the other cell phone. I'm probably forgetting a thing
    > > or two. Oh, yes, the PDA.
    > >
    > > Laptops and cell phones are hopeless, but I've put my foot down firmly
    > > on everything else. If it doesn't take standard rechargeables, it
    > > ain't coming in my house.
    > > --
    > > David Dyer-Bennet, <net>, <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
    > > RKBA: <noguns-nomoney.com> <www.dd-b.net/carry/>
    > > Photos: <dd-b.lighthunters.net> Snapshots:[/ref]
    > <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> [/ref]

    JK Guest

  13. #33

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant

    On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 17:29:01 -0400, Ken Zenachon <com>
    wrote:
     

    Damn straight. All cameras should come with a tiny hand crank and
    some sort of magneto system. Or, a 300 foot extension cord and an AC
    adapter. Or, a 300 foot set of jumper cables and a Die Hard 12V
    battery.



    --
    Tony Cooper aka: com
    Provider of Jots, Tittles, and Oy!s
    Tony Guest

  14. #34

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant

    you shoved away some really nice cameras.
    I have a Canon S230. The battery lasts for my uses.
    (Parties...outings...family...)
    and the CF cards are great.
    I "might" consider another battery (which is reasonably cheap from
    terrascout) IF my battery dies on me this week since I might be using it a
    little bit more. I know that two of these batteries would be enough.
    Unless you're away from a power source for more than a week...and you're a
    figurative 24/7 shutterbug..(taking random pictures of trees for
    instance...)...there's nothing wrong with proprietary batteries.
    In fact, Li-ions can be charged any time you like w/o problems. (although
    NiMH is better than NiCD...I believe it still has some issues if not fully
    discharged....right?) and NiMh lose their charge over time.
    my 0.02

    "JK" <net> wrote in message
    news:net... 
    > >
    > > Why would Canon want to design a POS camera like the U20?[/ref]
    >[/ref]


    J Guest

  15. #35

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant

    Ken Zenachon wrote: 

    Don Quixote!

    Abrasha
    http://www.abrasha.com
    Abrasha Guest

  16. #36

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant

    Ron Hunter <net> wrote in
    news:EbkSa.33665$atl2.webusenet.com:
     
    >>
    >>
    >> So what do you want? Are you being too particular? There are a lot of
    >> cameras that use 2, 3 or 4 AA NiMH cells. Likewise, there are cameras
    >> which accept remote battery packs (or can be modified to do so). You
    >> can use anything, including lead-acid cells, then.
    >>
    >> Personally, one of my reasons for choosing my current camera was that
    >> it had to use AA cells. Anything else was unacceptable. I was even
    >> prepared to sacrifice a little picture quality for it! (There were
    >> several other reasons for my choice though!).
    >>[/ref]
    >
    > There are a number of benefits to the Lithium Ion batteries, but can't
    > there be a STANDARD which various companies can adopt? I don't
    > understand why we can't have the best of both worlds, standards, and
    > Lithium Ion batteries, BOTH.
    >[/ref]

    There are also disadvantages to Lithium Ion. Charging has to be
    terminated by battery current detection, temperature monitoring seems to
    be required and trickle charging is not possible (safely). They also have
    a fairly precise limit on the number of recharges possible - which makes
    them ideal for proprietory batteries doesn't it? ;-) The need for
    temperature, overcharge, overvoltage and overdischarge detection together
    with a thermal fuse and an overvoltage fuse (all generally included
    together on a "safety board" fitted inside the battery) means that it is
    very difficult, if not impossible, to put rechargable Lithium Ion
    technology into 2-terminal batteries like AAs. Don't hold your breath!

    If someone could make rechargable lithium-ion in an AA then they almost
    certainly would. As it is, any that you managed to make would promptly
    get plugged into the wrong chargers and explode!

    --
    Mick
    http://www.nascom.info for Nascom & Gemini info.
    Also at http://www.mixtel.co.uk
    Return email address is munged.
    Form@C Guest

  17. #37

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant

    Ken Zenachon <com> wrote in
    news:com:
     
    <snip>

    As a matter of interest, Samsung now do a rechargable Lion battery in the
    familiar CR-V3 format, which also fits some 2AA and 4AA cameras
    (including mine! - Yippee!). Charging could be fun though...

    http://www.digit.no/Nyheter/Teknologi/samsung_ipack.htm

    --
    Mick
    http://www.nascom.info for Nascom & Gemini info.
    Also at http://www.mixtel.co.uk
    Return email address is munged.
    Form@C Guest

  18. #38

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant

    ahh, then the elfs probably aren't for you if you're taking "that" many
    shots.
    but it's lasted me a whole day of shooting and it didn't die on me! just
    popped it in the charger and it was ready to go the next day.

    "JK" <net> wrote in message
    news:net... 
    >
    > CF is much more reasonably priced than memory sticks.
    > [/ref]

    >
    > I would need several spares, as I can shoot many shots in a day, and
    > like to run the display for long periods of time. I can go through
    > two or three sets of 4 nimh AA batteries in a day. The Elf battery has
    > less than half the power of 4 AA 1800 mah nimh batteries. Imagine
    > what 6 extra Elf batteries would cost me!
    > [/ref]
    a [/ref]
    (although [/ref]
    fully 
    >
    > No

    >
    > So what. I typically use my camera a few times a week, and usually
    > have 3 or 4 charged sets of 4 AA nimh batteries ready. The
    > power loss over time of nonuse is quite moderate at 75F, perhaps
    > only around 1% or so a day. It does get much higher with high
    > temperatures though. At around 100F, it might be 3% or so per day.
    > [/ref][/ref]
    battery [/ref]
    >[/ref]


    J Guest

  19. #39

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant

    "Bob O`Bob" <com> wrote in message
    news:com... 
    > There is an extraneous attribution line, with NO quotations associated.
    > One need only count the number of attribution characters (">") at the
    > beginning of each line to see it.[/ref]

    I mean no offence to anyone, but this issue has been discussed on multiple
    newgroups for years. As an example, this post implies that Bob Gross wrote
    something he did not: to wit, "There is an extraneous attribution line, with
    NO quotations associated. One need only count the number of attribution
    characters (">") at the beginning of each line to see it."

    The better procedure would be to simply leave the line "> Robertwgross
    wrote:" out of the post, thus removing any confusion by not forcing people
    to laboriously track attribute remarks. Simple common courtesy.





    Flycaster Guest

  20. #40

    Default Re: Proprietary Battery Rant

    Flycaster wrote: 

    Further, the text line about Minolta was not written by me. Somebody just got
    carried away without checking what they were doing.

    ---Bob Gross---
    Robertwgross Guest

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. What size is my doent? [long rant]
    By wpcoprep@adobeforums.com in forum Adobe Acrobat Macintosh
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: June 20th, 11:49 PM
  2. Proprietary
    By ok123123123 in forum Macromedia Flash Flashcom
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: September 30th, 11:35 AM
  3. my bi-annual rant about png files....
    By Alexander Ross in forum Macromedia Fireworks
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: October 12th, 02:10 PM
  4. My quarterly RAID5 rant, enhanced.
    By Impy in forum Informix
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 1st, 04:59 PM
  5. Test (rant included)
    By Bonnie In Sacramento in forum Macromedia Dreamweaver
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 28th, 01:59 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139