NiMH vs Lithium-Ion batteries

Could you experts please enlighten me on the differences between NiMH and
Lithium-Ion batteries? For example, why does the Canon PowerShot A-series use
NiMH batteries, but the Canon PowerShot SD-series use Lithium-Ion batteries?

Will lithium-ion batteries eventually replace NiMH batteries? Or will both
types continue to be used well into the future?

writes:
Could you experts please enlighten me on the differences between
NiMH and Lithium-Ion batteries? For example, why does the Canon
PowerShot A-series use NiMH batteries, but the Canon PowerShot
SD-series use Lithium-Ion batteries?

Li ion batteries can be made in arbitrary shapes while NiMH batteries
are usually cylindrical. In the SD series, the thin rectangular
battery helps make the camera smaller. Li ion batteries also
weigh a lot less than NiMH batteries for the same amount of stored
energy.

A lot of the time, though, the advantages of li ion aren't that
important, and manufacturers use specially made incompatible li ion
batteries in order to sell additional expensive stuff to the customer.
There is finally starting to be a backlash against that. A couple of
years ago, most digicams used proprietary batteries and needed. Now
most of the manufacturers have cameras like the Powershot A-series
that use AA's, and customers understand why they benefit from that
(able to use the same NiMH batteries and chargers in several cameras,
etc).

Will lithium-ion batteries eventually replace NiMH batteries?

I hope not, at least under the current scam.

Or will both types continue to be used well into the future?

Yes, probably.

Paul Rubin wrote:
writes:
Could you experts please enlighten me on the differences between
NiMH and Lithium-Ion batteries? For example, why does the Canon
PowerShot A-series use NiMH batteries, but the Canon PowerShot
SD-series use Lithium-Ion batteries?

Li ion batteries can be made in arbitrary shapes while NiMH batteries
are usually cylindrical. In the SD series, the thin rectangular
battery helps make the camera smaller. Li ion batteries also
weigh a lot less than NiMH batteries for the same amount of stored
energy.

A lot of the time, though, the advantages of li ion aren't that
important, and manufacturers use specially made incompatible li ion
batteries in order to sell additional expensive stuff to the customer.
There is finally starting to be a backlash against that. A couple of
years ago, most digicams used proprietary batteries and needed. Now
most of the manufacturers have cameras like the Powershot A-series
that use AA's, and customers understand why they benefit from that
(able to use the same NiMH batteries and chargers in several cameras,
etc).

Will lithium-ion batteries eventually replace NiMH batteries?

I hope not, at least under the current scam.

Or will both types continue to be used well into the future?

Yes, probably.

They both have advantages and disadvantages, most of which are listed
in the post above. I don't see any "scam" here. Li ion batteries
usually cost more initially because they're lighter and hold a bigger
charge. The camera companies charge more for them because they're made
to fit the camera, and they can get away with it. When you consider the
overall cost of a new digital camera and all the accessories needed,
batteries, charger, memory card, card reader, etc., it isn't very much.
And if it's a reasonably popular camera, a replacement battery will be
available within months of the camera's release into the market at a
much lower price.
When I bought my new camera a couple of months ago, I researched the
battery question carefully. I came to the conclusion that I didn't care
whether the camera I bought used AA (standard size) or a proprietary Li
Ion battery, the cost would be roughly the same, after I bought the
batteries, recharger, etc. Most of the cameras that come with
proprietary batteries, usually Li ion, come with a recharger. If you
buy a second battery, which is a good idea, you don't have to buy a
recharger, unless you need to recharge outside the camera. Whey you buy
the rechargeable AA's or AAA's, you have to buy a recharger. While
cheap ones are out there, I heard enough horror stories here about the
cheap ones that I srpung some extra cash to get a high quality charger.
So it cost me more than a second Li ion battery would have cost even at
inflated dealer prices.
The only serious advantage of the NiMH's in standard sizes is that in a
serious bind, with no charged batteries handy, you can run to the store
and get Alkalines to get you through. Expensive, considering how long
they'll last in a digicam, but will get you the pix.
If you do a little online research and figure out how much the standard
size NiMH batteries and charger will cost, then compare it to the cost
of a spare Li Ion for a particular camera, you can make an intelligent
choice based on your own needs.
Hope this helps in your world.

"salgud" writes:

They both have advantages and disadvantages, most of which are listed
in the post above. I don't see any "scam" here. Li ion batteries
usually cost more initially because they're lighter and hold a bigger
charge. The camera companies charge more for them because they're made
to fit the camera, and they can get away with it. When you consider the
overall cost of a new digital camera and all the accessories needed,
batteries, charger, memory card, card reader, etc., it isn't very much.
And if it's a reasonably popular camera, a replacement battery will be
available within months of the camera's release into the market at a
much lower price.

That "much lower price" won't come anywhere near the $8.50 for a set
of 4 2300 MaH AA NiMH cells. And I'll still have an additional
charger to haul around. And that charger may well not be
international, and very probably doesn't work from a car lighter
plug (all of which my existing NiMH charger already handles).

And that battery may not be available *late* in the life of the
camera; they may have stopped producing it due to low demand. In
which case being unable to get a new battery (or a replacement
charger) may be what forces end of life for the camera.

As to cost, it depends. For a Fuji F10 at $320, paying an additional
$35 for another battery is about 10%. Doing that *every three years*
(which I hear is the average life of a Lion bettery) adds up over the
life of a camera even higher.

All of which means I may well end up buying a Canon A610 instead, and
sarificing the low-light performance of the Fuji F10. (The memory
card format is also somewhat of an issue, but *neither one* supports
compact flash, and neither does any other decent competitor. So I'll
spend probably as much as the camera costs buying new memory media in
some new format, and have to carry both around (all pro-level cameras
use CF, and look to continue to do so for the forseeable future
because there's no reason not to; the size isn't an issue in a DSLR,
and the capacity is important)).
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/

salgud wrote:

Paul Rubin wrote:
Li ion batteries can be made in arbitrary shapes while NiMH batteries
are usually cylindrical. In the SD series, the thin rectangular
battery helps make the camera smaller. Li ion batteries also weigh
a lot less than NiMH batteries for the same amount of stored energy.

A lot of the time, though, the advantages of li ion aren't that
important, and manufacturers use specially made incompatible li ion
batteries in order to sell additional expensive stuff to the customer.

They both have advantages and disadvantages, most of which are listed
in the post above. I don't see any "scam" here.

I do. Most manufacturer-supplied Li ion batteries are way overpriced.

One thing nobody has mentioned so far is that NiMH batteries have
a higher self-discharge rate than Li ion batteries. So if you go for
long periods without using your camera, it's best to get Li ion.

salgud wrote:
Paul Rubin wrote:

writes:

Could you experts please enlighten me on the differences between
NiMH and Lithium-Ion batteries? For example, why does the Canon
PowerShot A-series use NiMH batteries, but the Canon PowerShot
SD-series use Lithium-Ion batteries?

Li ion batteries can be made in arbitrary shapes while NiMH batteries
are usually cylindrical. In the SD series, the thin rectangular
battery helps make the camera smaller. Li ion batteries also
weigh a lot less than NiMH batteries for the same amount of stored
energy.

A lot of the time, though, the advantages of li ion aren't that
important, and manufacturers use specially made incompatible li ion
batteries in order to sell additional expensive stuff to the customer.
There is finally starting to be a backlash against that. A couple of
years ago, most digicams used proprietary batteries and needed. Now
most of the manufacturers have cameras like the Powershot A-series
that use AA's, and customers understand why they benefit from that
(able to use the same NiMH batteries and chargers in several cameras,
etc).


Will lithium-ion batteries eventually replace NiMH batteries?

I hope not, at least under the current scam.


Or will both types continue to be used well into the future?

Yes, probably.


They both have advantages and disadvantages, most of which are listed
in the post above. I don't see any "scam" here. Li ion batteries
usually cost more initially because they're lighter and hold a bigger
charge. The camera companies charge more for them because they're made
to fit the camera, and they can get away with it.

You've just outlined the scam, such as it is. Were the camera makers
thinking, "We can force people to buy expensive batteries from us,"
when they went to proprietary batteries? It most likely occurred to
them. Fortunately for customers, the market is fairly good at filling
voids like that with less expensive replacements.

When you consider the
overall cost of a new digital camera and all the accessories needed,
batteries, charger, memory card, card reader, etc., it isn't very much.
And if it's a reasonably popular camera, a replacement battery will be
available within months of the camera's release into the market at a
much lower price.
When I bought my new camera a couple of months ago, I researched the
battery question carefully. I came to the conclusion that I didn't care
whether the camera I bought used AA (standard size) or a proprietary Li
Ion battery, the cost would be roughly the same, after I bought the
batteries, recharger, etc. Most of the cameras that come with
proprietary batteries, usually Li ion, come with a recharger. If you
buy a second battery, which is a good idea, you don't have to buy a
recharger, unless you need to recharge outside the camera. Whey you buy
the rechargeable AA's or AAA's, you have to buy a recharger. While
cheap ones are out there, I heard enough horror stories here about the
cheap ones that I srpung some extra cash to get a high quality charger.

All this frenzy over smart chargers is amusing. I use two dumb-as-a-
rock chargers hooked up to a timer that's set to turn on for 1/2 hour
a day. I have three sets of batteries. One's always in the camera,
and the other two are normally getting trickle-charged in the chargers.
When I go off on a shoot, the charged spares go in the bag. When I come
back the depleted batteries go in the chargers with the timer set to 18
hours. (Approximately a full charge for these cells and these
chargers.) Once things are back to steady-state, I'm back to two sets
being trickle-charged and one in the camera. It's so dumb, it's
incapable of producing a horror story. :-)

So it cost me more than a second Li ion battery would have cost even at
inflated dealer prices.
The only serious advantage of the NiMH's in standard sizes is that in a
serious bind, with no charged batteries handy, you can run to the store
and get Alkalines to get you through. Expensive, considering how long
they'll last in a digicam, but will get you the pix.
If you do a little online research and figure out how much the standard
size NiMH batteries and charger will cost, then compare it to the cost
of a spare Li Ion for a particular camera, you can make an intelligent
choice based on your own needs.

Yup. Even figuring that Li ion batteries die in three years or so
regardless of use, the cost of batteries is a small factor in a camera
decision. I prefer AA's, but the camera I'm pinin' for uses a
proprietary battery. sigh

Hope this helps in your world.

As do I.

Paul Allen

Bill Tuthill wrote:
salgud wrote:

Paul Rubin wrote:

Li ion batteries can be made in arbitrary shapes while NiMH batteries
are usually cylindrical. In the SD series, the thin rectangular
battery helps make the camera smaller. Li ion batteries also weigh
a lot less than NiMH batteries for the same amount of stored energy.

A lot of the time, though, the advantages of li ion aren't that
important, and manufacturers use specially made incompatible li ion
batteries in order to sell additional expensive stuff to the customer.

They both have advantages and disadvantages, most of which are listed
in the post above. I don't see any "scam" here.


I do. Most manufacturer-supplied Li ion batteries are way overpriced.

One thing nobody has mentioned so far is that NiMH batteries have
a higher self-discharge rate than Li ion batteries. So if you go for
long periods without using your camera, it's best to get Li ion.

So many tradeoffs! The self-discharge problem is avoided by keeping
your spares on a trickle charge. The batteries in the camera may
discharge by the next time you use it, but the spares are always
fresh. And Li ion batteries self-degrade over time even when they're
not being used. Which is worse? A battery that predictably loses 1%
of its charge per day, or one that degrades to the point of unusability
after a few years? I dunno. I think the quality of the glass and the
ease with which I can get the camera to take the picture I see are
more important than the power source.

Paul Allen

brainlessly trolls:

Could you experts please enlighten me on the differences between NiMH and
Lithium-Ion batteries? [ ... unrelated babble deleted ...]

Why not just google up the answer in a few moments?

www.google.com: NiMH lithium ion

Quickly reveals:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NiMH
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_ion_battery

On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 09:23:33 -0800, Paul Allen wrote:

All this frenzy over smart chargers is amusing. I use two dumb-as-a-
rock chargers hooked up to a timer that's set to turn on for 1/2 hour
a day. I have three sets of batteries. One's always in the camera,
and the other two are normally getting trickle-charged in the chargers.

I skipped replying to your other message where you suggested
trickle charging NiMH batteries. Actually (and I think I got this
from some battery manufacturer's white paper, not sure of the
source, possibly Energizer) trickle charging is fine for NiCD
batteries, but not good for NiMH, so many NiMH chargers don't
trickle charge. But I do use your timer trick to keep some
appliance chargers going, though with two 1/2 hour charges/day.

I use enough AA NiMH batteries in devices other than cameras so if
I need a freshly charged set I usually have one or two available
that were charged no more than a few days earlier. I normally use a
fairly slow "smart" charger (more than 4 hours), but if I were to
quickly need a charged set but none were available, I also have a 30
minute charger, so the low discharge rate advantage of lithium
rechargeables isn't as significant as it might have been years
earlier when the time required to charge NiCD and NiMH batteries was
much greater. As many people here are aware, there are also several
15 minute chargers available, so it's not like the bad old days when
many chargers needed 13 hours (or more) to finish charging, and if
you needed to charger two sets of batteries . . .


When I go off on a shoot, the charged spares go in the bag. When I come
back the depleted batteries go in the chargers with the timer set to 18
hours. (Approximately a full charge for these cells and these
chargers.) Once things are back to steady-state, I'm back to two sets
being trickle-charged and one in the camera. It's so dumb, it's
incapable of producing a horror story. :-)

You've avoided the biggest risk, having a temporary power failure
while using fairly fast, high current "dumb" (timer based) chargers.
And even with those, horror stories wouldn't be very likely. Just a
slight reduction (possibly not even noticeable) in the battery
capacity. The horror stories are greatly overrated, but assuming
the worst, since they're only NiMH, it'll only cost a few dollars to
get a new set, and a set that's probably higher capacity than the
ones they're replacing. The *real* horror stories (involving smoke,
flame and worse) almost always occur when recharging lithiums, and
fortunately, that's fairly rare.

On 29 Nov 2005 23:05:20 -0800, Paul Rubin
wrote:

Li ion batteries can be made in arbitrary shapes while NiMH batteries
are usually cylindrical.

Usually. But there's nothing that prevents NiMH or alkaline or
manganese or carbon zinc from assuming arbitrary shapes. Sony's
small, thin "gumstick" rechargeable batteries are available in both
NiMH and Lithium versions. Not replaceable, as their voltages are
quite different. I haven't examined the lithium versions closely,
but I assume (hope) they're constructed to make it impossible to be
inserted in equiplment that uses the NiMH gumsticks. And of course
the super thin batteries used in greeting cards for over a decade
weren't lithium. Caveat: another assumption.


In the SD series, the thin rectangular battery helps make the camera
smaller. Li ion batteries also weigh a lot less than NiMH batteries for
the same amount of stored energy.

Lithiums do weigh much less, but in such small cameras, the weight
of small non-lithium batteries would hardly be objectionable. My
old not-very-efficient Canon Powershot uses a battery pack
containing 3 AAA NiMh cells. Considering the great efficiency
improvements cameras have made in the intervening years, only two
AAA batteries would provide much greater battery life per charge in
a new, smaller camera. Two of these AAAs could fit in an extremely
small camera, wouldn't weigh very much, and I'd consider getting one
as long as it had some manual controls. But I wouldn't get any that
use lithium batteries, not because they'd cost more, although in the
long run the additional cost would be significant, but because
someday replacement batteries probably won't be available. I'm not
a big fan of planned obsolescence.