Samsung S760: battery life

wrote:
Newbie thinking of getting a Samsung S760 as a first camera. It looks
a well made unit.
But what is the battery life going to be like? The unit takes 2 x AA
alkaline batteries.
Cheaper cameras take 2 x AAA batteries. I presume their battery life
will be shorter than cameras using 2 x AA?
Tips welcomed. I don't want to buy a camera and then have to spend a
fortune on batteries!

Thanks
Bruce

Bruce,

Get rechargeable batteries - although check first if your camera can take
them.

David

David J Taylor wrote:
wrote:
Newbie thinking of getting a Samsung S760 as a first camera. It looks
a well made unit.
But what is the battery life going to be like? The unit takes 2 x AA
alkaline batteries.
Cheaper cameras take 2 x AAA batteries. I presume their battery life
will be shorter than cameras using 2 x AA?
Tips welcomed. I don't want to buy a camera and then have to spend a
fortune on batteries!

Thanks
Bruce

Bruce,

Get rechargeable batteries - although check first if your camera can take
them.

David




Ideally get a camera which can take AA or AAA rechargeables, rather than
just one that can take a proprietary rechargeable battery.

wrote:
[]
I presume that this rules out the entry-level cameras at 30 to 50 UK
pounds.
What's the expected battery life for alkaline batteries in these
cameras?

bruce

Why not look up the specifications? There is a standard way of testing
digital cameras so the results should be comparable - more or less!

Cheers,
David

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 02:14:13 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

Ideally get a camera which can take AA or AAA rechargeables, rather than
just one that can take a proprietary rechargeable battery.

I presume that this rules out the entry-level cameras at 30 to 50 UK
pounds.
What's the expected battery life for alkaline batteries in these
cameras?

That's hard to say because camera battery performance can vary
considerably even with cameras that appear to be similar. For
example, you'd be hard pressed to see any difference between Nikon's
L5 and L6 cameras. Both use 2 AA batteries, but the L5 gets about
150 shots from alkalines and the L6 gets 400. The same goes for
Canon's A570IS and A590IS which look pretty much the same except for
the color of their plastic bodies. The A570IS is rated at getting
120 shots from a pair of alkalines and the A590IS about 200.

The number of shots you can expect will also vary widely depending
on your shooting style. Do you use the flash a lot, or take most
pictures outdoors with the flash disabled? The above battery
performance numbers are only valid if you shoot the way the tests
were performed. These were according to what is called the CIPA
standard, which alternates pictures using the flash at full power
and shots using no flash, and using the cameras LCD display to frame
the pictures. For the same tests, if rechargeable NiMH batteries
are used, both Canon cameras would be able to take more than 400
pictures per charge. If the flash isn't used and the optical
viewfinder is used instead of the Canon LCD displays, both cameras
can get 400 or more shots from a pair of alkalines or 900 to 1,000
shots per charge from NiMH batteries.

I'm surprised that the Samsung's manual didn't indicate battery
life. All of the Nikon, Canon, Fuji and Kodak manuals I've seen
specify battery life, usually but not always in the Specifications
pages. I also did a quick internet search for S760 reviews, but
didn't find much. The only mention of battery life was in one
website that had three user mini-reviews, and one of them listed
battery life among the camera's strengths. That doesn't tell us
much since we don't know how many shots the batteries lasted nor how
the camera was used.

Speaking of "how the camera was used", I recently tested Canon's
A570IS, which (as indicated above) should be able to take 120 shots
using alkaline AAs according to the CIPA test procedure results. I
used the flash as specified, but since I prefer using the optical
viewfinder, I disabled the LCD display for my own testing. I don't
know how many shots the cheap Rite-Aid alkaline batteries will
ultimately be good for, but they've already taken more than 180
shots, the camera hasn't yet displayed any battery warnings, and the
flash recycle time is still reasonable. YMMV.

wrote:
[]
I downloaded the Samsung manual. But it does not give an expected
battery life.

bruce

The trouble with using AA cells, Bruce, is that there are so many
different types, compared to the single type for the typical Li-ion
battery, and many different capacities both within the rechargeable range
(I have NiMH cells here with claimed capacities from 1300mAh up to
2800mAh), and within the primary cell range of types (regular, alkaline,
lithium etc). Samsung would need to specify the battery type very
carefully to be able to specify the number of pictures. Another drawback
of AA-powered cameras, I'm afraid.

You could see if any of the well-known sites does a comparison.

Cheers,
David

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 07:54:13 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

Both use 2 AA batteries, but the L5 gets about
150 shots from alkalines

Well, 150 shots would probably cover my needs for a 1 week holiday
away from home, with no recharger. Mostly daytime pics.
So, conventional alkaline AA battery life doesn't seem too bad for my
needs...

In that case, with mostly daytime pictures the L5 would probably
be able to take more than 300 shots using alkalines, unless the
camera is kept powered on most of the time and pictures are taken
only occasionally. For what it's worth, I've continued taking test
shots with the A570IS and the alkalines still are working well at
300 shots. At about 280 shots several shots were quite blurry and I
thought that the batteries might have been starting to fail, but it
turned out that I wasn't paying close attention to the focus
indicator, and the A570IS doesn't focus particularly well in dim
light. It may take several attempts in dim light to achieve good
focus, but now all of the shots are sharp again. I tried a pair of
fresh batteries, but they also didn't do very well in dim light. In
this respect, my slightly larger A620 (uses 4 AA cells) does much
better, and also focuses more quickly.

If you get the S760 (or any camera, actually), take a lot of test
shots before the holiday. There's practically no expense if you
don't have them printed. It always takes some time to come up to
speed with a new camera, and will help keep you from missing a lot
of good shot opportunities that might be lost if unfamiliarity
causes you to waste time getting each shot. It'll also give you
some idea of what to expect from the batteries. In any case, take a
spare pair of batteries even if you don't think that you'll need
them. A small LED flashlight/torch that uses two AA batteries makes
for a nice, convenient carrying case for them, and whenever the
batteries eventually die in the camera, you'll find that they'll
work nicely for many hours after being transferred to the
flashlight. If you use a flashlight that uses an incandescent bulb
instead of LEDs, the batteries may appear as dead as they were in
the camera.

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 15:01:24 GMT, David J Taylor dissembled:

The trouble with using AA cells, Bruce, is that there are so many
different types, compared to the single type for the typical Li-ion
battery, and many different capacities both within the rechargeable range
(I have NiMH cells here with claimed capacities from 1300mAh up to
2800mAh), and within the primary cell range of types (regular, alkaline,
lithium etc). Samsung would need to specify the battery type very
carefully to be able to specify the number of pictures. Another drawback
of AA-powered cameras, I'm afraid.

Congratulations. You've risen yet another level in the SMS School
of Spin. The vast majority of NiMH batteries that you'll find for
sale will range from about 2,000mAh to 2,700mAh. When did you buy
those 1,300mAh batteries, last century? I'm surprised that you
still have them, as their capacities have probably fallen by now to
700mAh or less, not even as much as a good NiCd AA cell. Or was it
just a 'theoretical/hypothetical' AA cell, used for argument's sake?

Since when does having more options represent a drawback? In
temperatures that are really too cold for NiMH and Li-Ion batteries
to operate properly, lithium AA batteries will do just fine, being
able to operate in temperatures colder by another 30 to 50 degrees.

DSLR manufacturers also improve their Li-Ion battery packs from
time to time, mainly increasing the mAh capacity. That also makes
it more difficult to provide accurate battery life information in
the manuals, but that's hardly the drawback that your logic demands.

DSLR manufacturers (Canon, Nikon, and others) also introduce new,
incompatible Li-Ion battery packs in new camera models from time to
time. No such problem with AA batteries. Whether alkaline of NiMH,
today's batteries will work just as well or better than the AA
alkalines or NiCd/NiMH batteries used in cameras 8 to 10 years ago.
That's not to say that there's anything seriously wrong with Li-Ion
batteries. They're a very good technology that satisfies many
camera owners, and is better for some applications and uses. Where
they don't do as well seems to coincide with your blind spots.

The way you continually attempt to push misleading battery
comparisons only shows that you really aren't very different from
SMS, albeit in a slicker, somewhat more appealing package. Your need
to show that AA batteries are so horrible that they might as well be
products of an evil empire is bizarre and quite sad. You'd be well
advised to grow up and abandon your juvenile crusade.

ASAAR wrote:
[]
The way you continually attempt to push misleading battery
comparisons only shows that you really aren't very different from
SMS, albeit in a slicker, somewhat more appealing package. Your need
to show that AA batteries are so horrible that they might as well be
products of an evil empire is bizarre and quite sad. You'd be well
advised to grow up and abandon your juvenile crusade.

I see that as soon as I let you out of the killfile - it's back to
personal insults rather than reasoned argument. Should I be surprised?
As previously noted, I use AA cells where required.

However, you do not refute my comment that having different capacities for
AA cells makes it impossible to quote an accurate number of pictures,
unless the cell type is precisely stated.

David

On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:53:55 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:

The way you continually attempt to push misleading battery
comparisons only shows that you really aren't very different from
SMS, albeit in a slicker, somewhat more appealing package. Your need
to show that AA batteries are so horrible that they might as well be
products of an evil empire is bizarre and quite sad. You'd be well
advised to grow up and abandon your juvenile crusade.

I see that as soon as I let you out of the killfile - it's back to
personal insults rather than reasoned argument. Should I be surprised?

If you see that as a personal insult it's only because you refuse
to see or admit that you've become a mini-SMS, rarely able to avoid
telling people that prefer using AA batteries that they're seriously
flawed. Accurately describing what you've said doesn't amount to
personal insults when it's an accurate description. Try to show
that I'm mistaken and I'll take you seriously, and if you
demonstrate that what you've said is fair and accurate, I'll admit
it. But so far you've just ignored the charges, preferring to
sidestep the issues by whining about being insulted. If you intend
to continue with the "juvenile crusade", how better than to use
SMS's kill file tactic, which will make it all the easier to ignore
irrefutable charges.

Here's a significant difference between SMS (and I believe you as
well) and myself. I don't latch onto one attribute (such as the
cost of Li-Ion batteries and AA cells), find one usage that supports
a preference or bias, and then ignore all other usages that show the
opposite. I've heard many times that Li-Ion batteries have a much
lower long-term cost and have much better battery life (per charge)
than AA batteries. That's true for some photographers and with some
cameras, but completely false for others. You repeatedly disparage
AA battery life and convenience that others might value by making it
appear that only the Li-Ion battery life and convenience that *you*
value is of any consequence. You fail to take into account that if
people have different shooting styles, the Li-Ion advantages that
you prefer may well become disadvantages.

When it comes to promoting that which he prefers, or attack that
which he dislikes, the most deceitful is SMS, who recently has been
repeatedly stating in these photo newsgroups that Canon's A570 IS
has such terrible alkaline AA battery life that a pair of fresh
alkalines will only be able to take from 10 to 20 shots before
needing to be replaced. Do you believe him, or think that there's
the remotest possibility that this is true? (This, by the way, for
whatever reason, is the type of question that you habitually
ignore.) That's complete nonsense, and if he made similar bogus
claims about any decent, popular camera that uses Li-Ion batteries,
based on your track record you'd immediately question him about
this, and rightfully so. But assuming that the A570 IS really was
that bad, and its horrendous battery life wasn't due to a defective
camera but was representative of all A570s, that would make it one
of the worst P&S cameras available and one to be avoided at all
costs. Strange, then, that SMS has posted several messages in the
last week or so telling us that it's available from Sears at a nice
sale price. What's that? Horrible battery life. It uses AA
batteries that he despises. And he's telling us how to get one?
Whatever happened to his promise to test the camera when his "female
relative" returned the camera? Something doesn't add up, but with
SMS, that's nothing new.


As previously noted, I use AA cells where required.

And that's completely irrelevant. In no way does it justify
making false or unfair statements. It's a tactic often used to
imply credibility and/or fairness, and belied by most of what you
usually say about AA cells. I recently bought a small Panasonic
P&S. If I suddenly started to unfairly disparage other Panasonic
cameras, would that validate any bogus statements made about them?
Of course not. At least you didn't say that some of your best
friends own cameras that use AA batteries.


However, you do not refute my comment that having different capacities for
AA cells makes it impossible to quote an accurate number of pictures,
unless the cell type is precisely stated.

That's a specious, silly and ultimately stupid comment, for
several reasons which should be clear if you think about it. The
battery hasn't been made (for consumers, at least), whether
alkaline, NiMH or Li-Ion that is sold with a tested, accurate mAh
rating for each cell, and then sold in matched pairs. Canon's
manual doesn't say that their own NiMH batteries all deliver
2,500mAh. It says that the 2,500mAh rated cells typically vary from
2,300mAh to 2,500mAh. When new, of course. Li-Ion batteries are
also subject to this variability and they also lose capacity with
use and age. Nothing surprising there, and anyone with a
reasonable amount of intelligence should be able to understand this
and take it into account. Second, and of much greater consequence,
an accurate number of shots can *never* be stated. All that can be
stated is that if one shoots in a manner similar to the way the
tests were performed, one should expect to get similar results. The
CIPA test has a lot of value, but *nobody* shoots that way,
alternating full power flash shots with non-flash shots. Or shoots
only on days where the temperature matches the temperature used by
the manufacturer to test the cameras. I've found when trying to
emulate the CIPA tests for several cameras, that the values stated
by Fuji and Canon are pretty accurate for most alkaline batteries,
including the cheapest "house brand" batteries. Rechargeables,
preferably the Eneloop type of low self discharge NiMH batteries
typically provide two to three times the number of shots per charge,
and with some models allows well over 1,000, possibly 2,000 shots
per charge. Yet you see this as a drawback. You can't be serious?

ASAAR wrote:
On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:53:55 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:

The way you continually attempt to push misleading battery
comparisons only shows that you really aren't very different from
SMS, albeit in a slicker, somewhat more appealing package. Your need
to show that AA batteries are so horrible that they might as well be
products of an evil empire is bizarre and quite sad. You'd be well
advised to grow up and abandon your juvenile crusade.

I see that as soon as I let you out of the killfile - it's back to
personal insults rather than reasoned argument. Should I be
surprised?

If you see that as a personal insult it's only because you refuse
to see or admit that you've become a mini-SMS, rarely able to avoid
telling people that prefer using AA batteries that they're seriously
flawed. Accurately describing what you've said doesn't amount to
personal insults when it's an accurate description. Try to show
that I'm mistaken and I'll take you seriously, and if you
demonstrate that what you've said is fair and accurate, I'll admit
it. But so far you've just ignored the charges, preferring to
sidestep the issues by whining about being insulted. If you intend
to continue with the "juvenile crusade", how better than to use
SMS's kill file tactic, which will make it all the easier to ignore
irrefutable charges.

Here's a significant difference between SMS (and I believe you as
well) and myself. I don't latch onto one attribute (such as the
cost of Li-Ion batteries and AA cells), find one usage that supports
a preference or bias, and then ignore all other usages that show the
opposite. I've heard many times that Li-Ion batteries have a much
lower long-term cost and have much better battery life (per charge)
than AA batteries. That's true for some photographers and with some
cameras, but completely false for others. You repeatedly disparage
AA battery life and convenience that others might value by making it
appear that only the Li-Ion battery life and convenience that *you*
value is of any consequence. You fail to take into account that if
people have different shooting styles, the Li-Ion advantages that
you prefer may well become disadvantages.

When it comes to promoting that which he prefers, or attack that
which he dislikes, the most deceitful is SMS, who recently has been
repeatedly stating in these photo newsgroups that Canon's A570 IS
has such terrible alkaline AA battery life that a pair of fresh
alkalines will only be able to take from 10 to 20 shots before
needing to be replaced. Do you believe him, or think that there's
the remotest possibility that this is true? (This, by the way, for
whatever reason, is the type of question that you habitually
ignore.) That's complete nonsense, and if he made similar bogus
claims about any decent, popular camera that uses Li-Ion batteries,
based on your track record you'd immediately question him about
this, and rightfully so. But assuming that the A570 IS really was
that bad, and its horrendous battery life wasn't due to a defective
camera but was representative of all A570s, that would make it one
of the worst P&S cameras available and one to be avoided at all
costs. Strange, then, that SMS has posted several messages in the
last week or so telling us that it's available from Sears at a nice
sale price. What's that? Horrible battery life. It uses AA
batteries that he despises. And he's telling us how to get one?
Whatever happened to his promise to test the camera when his "female
relative" returned the camera? Something doesn't add up, but with
SMS, that's nothing new.


As previously noted, I use AA cells where required.

And that's completely irrelevant. In no way does it justify
making false or unfair statements. It's a tactic often used to
imply credibility and/or fairness, and belied by most of what you
usually say about AA cells. I recently bought a small Panasonic
P&S. If I suddenly started to unfairly disparage other Panasonic
cameras, would that validate any bogus statements made about them?
Of course not. At least you didn't say that some of your best
friends own cameras that use AA batteries.


However, you do not refute my comment that having different
capacities for AA cells makes it impossible to quote an accurate
number of pictures, unless the cell type is precisely stated.

That's a specious, silly and ultimately stupid comment, for
several reasons which should be clear if you think about it. The
battery hasn't been made (for consumers, at least), whether
alkaline, NiMH or Li-Ion that is sold with a tested, accurate mAh
rating for each cell, and then sold in matched pairs. Canon's
manual doesn't say that their own NiMH batteries all deliver
2,500mAh. It says that the 2,500mAh rated cells typically vary from
2,300mAh to 2,500mAh. When new, of course. Li-Ion batteries are
also subject to this variability and they also lose capacity with
use and age. Nothing surprising there, and anyone with a
reasonable amount of intelligence should be able to understand this
and take it into account. Second, and of much greater consequence,
an accurate number of shots can *never* be stated. All that can be
stated is that if one shoots in a manner similar to the way the
tests were performed, one should expect to get similar results. The
CIPA test has a lot of value, but *nobody* shoots that way,
alternating full power flash shots with non-flash shots. Or shoots
only on days where the temperature matches the temperature used by
the manufacturer to test the cameras. I've found when trying to
emulate the CIPA tests for several cameras, that the values stated
by Fuji and Canon are pretty accurate for most alkaline batteries,
including the cheapest "house brand" batteries. Rechargeables,
preferably the Eneloop type of low self discharge NiMH batteries
typically provide two to three times the number of shots per charge,
and with some models allows well over 1,000, possibly 2,000 shots
per charge. Yet you see this as a drawback. You can't be serious?

Anyone who wants to know my views should read my posts directly, and not
your interpretation of what I say. We may be divided by a common
langauge. It is not my intention, and I hope not my practice, to make
inaccurate statements.

I have not commented on the Canon A570 because I have no direct experience
of that camera. People can read the normal review sites. My friend has
an A630, which does take AA cells, but I don't think that to read the A630
performance into the A570 would be wise.

If you wish to make statements about Panasonic cameras that's up to you -
I can judge them in the light of my own experience.

Getting more shots from a set of cells is not a "drawback". I do hope the
OP is able to get a better answer from the Samsung documentation than I
was.

David