A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Synergy Batteries -- Can anyone comment?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old July 6th 10, 11:53 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Robert Spanjaard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 311
Default Synergy Batteries -- Can anyone comment?

On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 21:18:01 -0500, Joel Connor wrote:

On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 01:35:19 +0000 (UTC), (Mike S.)
wrote:


In article , Joel Connor
wrote:

There's a new type of 1.25v AA battery on the market, using a Lithium
Polymer configuration (not unlike the flat-pack in my MP3 player, but
at a different voltage) marketed by a company name of Hahnel.

A quick cursory search for reviews and discussions seem favorable. With
good low-temperature performance down to 23° F (-5° C), fast charging
times, etc.

Anyone here ever use them and care to comment?



No experience, but your teaser sparked me interest and I looked around.
Unfortunately, the only product under this brand/model I can find is a
pre-charged NiMH cell ... even at the manufacturer's website
(
http://www.hahnel.ie/index.cfm/page/aamignonbatteries).

Can you post a reference to a Li-Poly AA product?


I'm getting conflicting information between ads and posts I've read.
Such as this one from amazon.co.uk

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hahnel-Synergy-AA-Rechargeable-Batteries/dp/B000LY25WQ/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1278381027&sr =8-2
which states:

"Product Description
hahnel Synergy batteries offer a number of advantages over traditional
alkaline batteries, including up to four times more power when used in a
digital camera, high performance even at low temperatures (down to 23
degrees F) during your winter holiday, and a vast cost savings in the
long run. The Synergy advantages are even more glaring when compared to
typical NiMH batteries: not only are they ready for use right out of the
packet, but they generally last longer than most NiMH batteries
(continuous and frequent recharging can destroy other NiMH models) and
save both time and money (traditional NiMH charging is slow when you're
in a hurry, while rapid chargers are expensive). All told, you can
recharge these batteries up to 500 times without experiencing a memory
effect; just charge the amount you need and you're set."

Most are claiming a typical NiMH chemistry. One I had read claiming
Li-Poly (and can't find that thread now). It could be I read that page
too fast and confused it for a Li-Poly chemistry. Which had me wondering
because Lithium chemistry will define 3.7v. Though I couldn't figure out
how they got 1.25v base voltage from HiMH chemistry either.

Then there's also the "Mignon" (not Synergy) brand name from Hahnel that
also claims NiMH chemistry.


Oh, and Mignon is not a brand name.
It's just another name for "AA battery".

--
Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com
  #12  
Old July 6th 10, 01:50 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
J. Clarke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,690
Default Synergy Batteries -- Can anyone comment?

On 7/6/2010 6:53 AM, Robert Spanjaard wrote:
On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 21:18:01 -0500, Joel Connor wrote:

On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 01:35:19 +0000 (UTC), (Mike S.)
wrote:


In , Joel Connor
wrote:

There's a new type of 1.25v AA battery on the market, using a Lithium
Polymer configuration (not unlike the flat-pack in my MP3 player, but
at a different voltage) marketed by a company name of Hahnel.

A quick cursory search for reviews and discussions seem favorable. With
good low-temperature performance down to 23° F (-5° C), fast charging
times, etc.

Anyone here ever use them and care to comment?



No experience, but your teaser sparked me interest and I looked around.
Unfortunately, the only product under this brand/model I can find is a
pre-charged NiMH cell ... even at the manufacturer's website
(
http://www.hahnel.ie/index.cfm/page/aamignonbatteries).

Can you post a reference to a Li-Poly AA product?


I'm getting conflicting information between ads and posts I've read.
Such as this one from amazon.co.uk

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hahnel-Synergy-AA-Rechargeable-Batteries/dp/B000LY25WQ/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1278381027&sr =8-2
which states:

"Product Description
hahnel Synergy batteries offer a number of advantages over traditional
alkaline batteries, including up to four times more power when used in a
digital camera, high performance even at low temperatures (down to 23
degrees F) during your winter holiday, and a vast cost savings in the
long run. The Synergy advantages are even more glaring when compared to
typical NiMH batteries: not only are they ready for use right out of the
packet, but they generally last longer than most NiMH batteries
(continuous and frequent recharging can destroy other NiMH models) and
save both time and money (traditional NiMH charging is slow when you're
in a hurry, while rapid chargers are expensive). All told, you can
recharge these batteries up to 500 times without experiencing a memory
effect; just charge the amount you need and you're set."

Most are claiming a typical NiMH chemistry. One I had read claiming
Li-Poly (and can't find that thread now). It could be I read that page
too fast and confused it for a Li-Poly chemistry. Which had me wondering
because Lithium chemistry will define 3.7v. Though I couldn't figure out
how they got 1.25v base voltage from HiMH chemistry either.

Then there's also the "Mignon" (not Synergy) brand name from Hahnel that
also claims NiMH chemistry.


Oh, and Mignon is not a brand name.
It's just another name for "AA battery".


There appear to be two "Synergy" battery product lines, one produced by
Hahnel in Germany and the other by Synergy Digital in Brooklyn, NY. The
Hahnel product appears to be an Eneloop clone while Synergy appears to
be importing Chinese-clone OEM-replacement camera batteries.


  #13  
Old July 6th 10, 02:21 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Robert Sneddon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 115
Default Synergy Batteries -- Can anyone comment?

In message , J. Clarke
writes

There appear to be two "Synergy" battery product lines, one produced by
Hahnel in Germany and the other by Synergy Digital in Brooklyn, NY.
The Hahnel product appears to be an Eneloop clone while Synergy appears
to be importing Chinese-clone OEM-replacement camera batteries.


The Sanyo Eneloop low-discharge NiMH battery technology is being
licenced more widely nowadays. Initially such cells were sold by
name-brand battery manufacturers such as Rayovac's "Hybrio" or
Panasonic's "Infinium". Nowadays I'm seeing more and more online
suppliers of tech gear such as the British-based Maplin stores offering
similar low-discharge cells with their own branding (in Maplin's case
they're called Camelion). I'm guessing that the Synergy cells mentioned
are the same as everybody else's, run off a single production line and
only labelled at the end to differentiate them from the other people
selling such batteries.
--
To reply, my gmail address is nojay1 Robert Sneddon
  #14  
Old July 6th 10, 02:46 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,312
Default Synergy Batteries -- Can anyone comment?

On 06/07/10 3:53 AM, Robert Spanjaard wrote:

snip

Oh, and Mignon is not a brand name.
It's just another name for "AA battery".


I prefer to call the rechargeable AA's HR6 and the non-rechargeable AA's
LR6. Mignon (which is the French term for an AA battery) is too vague.

While there are rechargeable Li-Po and Li-Ion cells that are the
physical size of an R6 cell, (14500), the chemistry yields 3.6-3.7
volts. There are some devices that can use them because they have a
DC-DC converter with a very wide input range, but I've never known a
digital camera that could use them. Even "regular" AA batteries vary
significantly based on chemistry, from 1.2V to 1.7V, so there has to be
some accommodation built in.

There's no real advantage in terms of WH capacity of the 14500 Li-Ion
and Li-Po cells (versus NiMH), and when sold as an end-user product each
cell needs it's own protection circuitry built in (as opposed to one set
of protection circuitry for a multi-cell Li-Ion/Li-Po battery pack). You
do get the advantage of the low-temperature performance. Of course you
need a charger that's capable of charging them as well, since a NiMH
charger won't work.

The issue is rather moot these days as so few cameras still use AA
batteries, only the very low end P&S models and a few super-zoom P&S
models. You can use AA batteries in a lot of D-SLR battery grips, but
the performance of Li-Ion batteries is so much better that you'd rarely
do such a thing. Even the "ITMONW" rationalization is rather moot
because when you come across that 7-11 in the middle of nowhere and buy
R6 manganese batteries, they work poorly in digital cameras because of
their high internal resistance.

I suppose someone could make a 14500 lithium based cell than had an
internal buck-boost converter/charger so it could have a 1.5V output and
be chargeable in a NiMH charger, but that would be a pretty ridiculous
project.
  #15  
Old July 6th 10, 03:37 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Mike S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default Synergy Batteries -- Can anyone comment?


In article ,
SMS wrote:
On 06/07/10 3:53 AM, Robert Spanjaard wrote:

snip

Oh, and Mignon is not a brand name.
It's just another name for "AA battery".


I prefer to call the rechargeable AA's HR6 and the non-rechargeable AA's
LR6. Mignon (which is the French term for an AA battery) is too vague.

While there are rechargeable Li-Po and Li-Ion cells that are the
physical size of an R6 cell, (14500), the chemistry yields 3.6-3.7
volts. There are some devices that can use them because they have a
DC-DC converter with a very wide input range, but I've never known a
digital camera that could use them. Even "regular" AA batteries vary
significantly based on chemistry, from 1.2V to 1.7V, so there has to be
some accommodation built in.

There's no real advantage in terms of WH capacity of the 14500 Li-Ion
and Li-Po cells (versus NiMH), and when sold as an end-user product each
cell needs it's own protection circuitry built in (as opposed to one set
of protection circuitry for a multi-cell Li-Ion/Li-Po battery pack). You
do get the advantage of the low-temperature performance. Of course you
need a charger that's capable of charging them as well, since a NiMH
charger won't work.

The issue is rather moot these days as so few cameras still use AA
batteries, only the very low end P&S models and a few super-zoom P&S
models. You can use AA batteries in a lot of D-SLR battery grips, but
the performance of Li-Ion batteries is so much better that you'd rarely
do such a thing. Even the "ITMONW" rationalization is rather moot
because when you come across that 7-11 in the middle of nowhere and buy
R6 manganese batteries, they work poorly in digital cameras because of
their high internal resistance.

I suppose someone could make a 14500 lithium based cell than had an
internal buck-boost converter/charger so it could have a 1.5V output and
be chargeable in a NiMH charger, but that would be a pretty ridiculous
project.


My interest in this type of product is for electronic flash. For instance,
the external flash for my Olympus uses two AA cells. It also takes CR-V3
primary packs, which deliver much better performance. Unfortunately the
RCR-V3 (which is basically two 14500's in parallel with special circuit to
make it look like two AA's in series) are disappointing. Not only do
reviewers say they last no longer than NiMH, but they can't deliver the
current necessary to charge a flash and end up dying after the first shot.

I was hopnig the product described here might be better, but it seems they
are not what they were described as being.



  #16  
Old July 6th 10, 04:12 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,312
Default Synergy Batteries -- Can anyone comment?

On 06/07/10 7:37 AM, Mike S. wrote:

snip

My interest in this type of product is for electronic flash. For instance,
the external flash for my Olympus uses two AA cells. It also takes CR-V3
primary packs, which deliver much better performance. Unfortunately the
RCR-V3 (which is basically two 14500's in parallel with special circuit to
make it look like two AA's in series) are disappointing. Not only do
reviewers say they last no longer than NiMH, but they can't deliver the
current necessary to charge a flash and end up dying after the first shot.

I was hopnig the product described here might be better, but it seems they
are not what they were described as being.


Unfortunately there's no such animal as li-ion or li-po R6 battery, and
unlikely to be one.

To me it's annoying to have to use AA batteries for the flash, and BP511
Li-Ion packs for the camera. I could use AA batteries in the grip, but
AA NiMH performance is much worse than BP511 performance, and in reality
the NiMH batteries are no cheaper because BP511 packs are so widely
available at such low prics. I wish Canon had made their later flashes
able to use a BP511 or four AA cells. If it can work with four Lithium
non-rechargeables at 4 x 1.7V = 6.8V then it could certainly have been
made to work at the 7.4V of a BP511.

I don't know what they did to the the RCR-V3 to limit the current to the
point that it can't deliver enough current to charge the flash since
there's no inherent reason that a 14500 could not deliver enough
current. I use eneloops in my flash, but it's rather annoying to have to
carry two different chargers. OTOH I would have an AA charger along for
other devices anyway on most trips.
  #17  
Old July 6th 10, 09:12 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Joel Connor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 56
Default Synergy Batteries -- Can anyone comment?

On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 08:12:48 -0700, SMS wrote:

On 06/07/10 7:37 AM, Mike S. wrote:

snip

My interest in this type of product is for electronic flash. For instance,
the external flash for my Olympus uses two AA cells. It also takes CR-V3
primary packs, which deliver much better performance. Unfortunately the
RCR-V3 (which is basically two 14500's in parallel with special circuit to
make it look like two AA's in series) are disappointing. Not only do
reviewers say they last no longer than NiMH, but they can't deliver the
current necessary to charge a flash and end up dying after the first shot.

I was hopnig the product described here might be better, but it seems they
are not what they were described as being.


Unfortunately there's no such animal as li-ion or li-po R6 battery, and
unlikely to be one.

To me it's annoying to have to use AA batteries for the flash, and BP511
Li-Ion packs for the camera. I could use AA batteries in the grip, but
AA NiMH performance is much worse than BP511 performance, and in reality
the NiMH batteries are no cheaper because BP511 packs are so widely
available at such low prics. I wish Canon had made their later flashes
able to use a BP511 or four AA cells. If it can work with four Lithium
non-rechargeables at 4 x 1.7V = 6.8V then it could certainly have been
made to work at the 7.4V of a BP511.

I don't know what they did to the the RCR-V3 to limit the current to the
point that it can't deliver enough current to charge the flash since
there's no inherent reason that a 14500 could not deliver enough
current. I use eneloops in my flash, but it's rather annoying to have to
carry two different chargers. OTOH I would have an AA charger along for
other devices anyway on most trips.


Now that we've gotten all of pretend-photographer troll SMS's vibrator
power-source information out of the way ...

Has anyone used these particular batteries in their cameras and do they
live up to their claims?

  #18  
Old July 6th 10, 09:25 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,312
Default Synergy Batteries -- Can anyone comment?

On 06/07/10 6:21 AM, Robert Sneddon wrote:
In , J. Clarke
writes

There appear to be two "Synergy" battery product lines, one produced by
Hahnel in Germany and the other by Synergy Digital in Brooklyn, NY.
The Hahnel product appears to be an Eneloop clone while Synergy appears
to be importing Chinese-clone OEM-replacement camera batteries.


The Sanyo Eneloop low-discharge NiMH battery technology is being
licenced more widely nowadays.


Is it being licensed or are other companies just building their
batteries in a similar manner? What Sanyo did with the eneloop product
is not rocket science--the technology for reducing self-discharge in
Nickel based batteries is not new.

The problem is that same design changes that reduce self-discharge also
reduce capacity, and we were seeing something similar to megapixel wars
with mAH wars. People just got fed up enough with self-discharge that
they were willing to go with eneloop AA cells at 2000mAH versus regular
NiMH AA cells which have up to 50% greater capacity.

While the eneloop, and other low self-discharge cells, solve one of the
major problems with NiMH cells, they still have most of the drawbacks of
AA cells in general, and NiMH cells in particular.

More information is available at "http://batterydata.com/".
  #19  
Old July 6th 10, 11:17 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Robert Sneddon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 115
Default Synergy Batteries -- Can anyone comment?

In message , SMS
writes
On 06/07/10 6:21 AM, Robert Sneddon wrote:


The Sanyo Eneloop low-discharge NiMH battery technology is being
licenced more widely nowadays.


Is it being licensed or are other companies just building their
batteries in a similar manner?


AFAIK Sanyo has patents on the methods of making the electrodes and
internal support structures that reduce the self-discharge rate
significantly. Unless the other manufacturers have arranged licencing
then they are open to lawsuits for infringement or they have twiddled
their designs sufficiently to avoid the legal problems. I've not heard
anything one way or another.

What Sanyo did with the eneloop product is not rocket science--the
technology for reducing self-discharge in Nickel based batteries is not
new.


Patent lifespan is 19 years as I recall -- I don't remember seeing low
-discharge-rate Ni-chemistry cells on the market before much before
2005.

The problem is that same design changes that reduce self-discharge also
reduce capacity, and we were seeing something similar to megapixel wars
with mAH wars. People just got fed up enough with self-discharge that
they were willing to go with eneloop AA cells at 2000mAH versus regular
NiMH AA cells which have up to 50% greater capacity.


I've used high-capacity Ni-chemistry cells in the past but I noticed
that their self-discharge tended to obviate the claimed extra capacity
unless I was incredibly diligent about charging them immediately before
use. In addition the increased capacity never seemed to survive more
than a dozen or two dozen recharge cycles. I used (and still use) simple
Ni-battery chargers with limited intelligence which probably didn't
help. The charge retention of the Eneloops and their successors are a
great convenience and I make up for the more limited capacity by
carrying a spare set of similar low-discharge cells along with me. Maybe
higher-capacity versions of the 1st-gen technology will appear in the
future, who knows?

While the eneloop, and other low self-discharge cells, solve one of the
major problems with NiMH cells, they still have most of the drawbacks
of AA cells in general, and NiMH cells in particular.


Still better than Li-chemistry cells with their high self-discharge
rate, generally limited operating lifespan and their finicky charging
and temperature requirements. They also don't store well -- I bought a
laptop once, surplus but still sealed in its box and unopened. The
brand-new Li battery pack was dead on arrival, failing to take a charge.
The battery pack had a date code on the case indicating it had been
built only two years before. Conversely low-discharge N-MH cells come
precharged and work well even after being stored for over a year as
tests have proved, with (as I recall) 70% of measured capacity.

As a data point my first set of Eneloops AA cells are at least three
years old and still doing sterling service regardless of what kind of
cheap Ni-chemistry charger I put them in. I have a plethora of
Li-chemistry batteries for my phone, laptop, one of my cameras etc. and
they all need their own special charging units since there is no
"universal" Li-ion battery pack for such commodity devices. Worst case
out in the field I can swap out my AA and AAA Ni-MH batteries for
alkalines from a local store, something that is not possible with most
units powered by Li-chemistry cells.

More information is available at "http://batterydata.com/".


That's your vanity website, yes?
--
To reply, my gmail address is nojay1 Robert Sneddon
  #20  
Old July 7th 10, 12:03 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,312
Default Synergy Batteries -- Can anyone comment?

On 06/07/10 3:17 PM, Robert Sneddon wrote:
In , SMS
writes
On 06/07/10 6:21 AM, Robert Sneddon wrote:


The Sanyo Eneloop low-discharge NiMH battery technology is being
licenced more widely nowadays.


Is it being licensed or are other companies just building their
batteries in a similar manner?


AFAIK Sanyo has patents on the methods of making the electrodes and
internal support structures that reduce the self-discharge rate
significantly. Unless the other manufacturers have arranged licencing
then they are open to lawsuits for infringement or they have twiddled
their designs sufficiently to avoid the legal problems. I've not heard
anything one way or another.

What Sanyo did with the eneloop product is not rocket science--the
technology for reducing self-discharge in Nickel based batteries is not
new.


Patent lifespan is 19 years as I recall -- I don't remember seeing low
-discharge-rate Ni-chemistry cells on the market before much before
2005.

The problem is that same design changes that reduce self-discharge also
reduce capacity, and we were seeing something similar to megapixel wars
with mAH wars. People just got fed up enough with self-discharge that
they were willing to go with eneloop AA cells at 2000mAH versus regular
NiMH AA cells which have up to 50% greater capacity.


I've used high-capacity Ni-chemistry cells in the past but I noticed
that their self-discharge tended to obviate the claimed extra capacity
unless I was incredibly diligent about charging them immediately before
use. In addition the increased capacity never seemed to survive more
than a dozen or two dozen recharge cycles. I used (and still use) simple
Ni-battery chargers with limited intelligence which probably didn't
help. The charge retention of the Eneloops and their successors are a
great convenience and I make up for the more limited capacity by
carrying a spare set of similar low-discharge cells along with me. Maybe
higher-capacity versions of the 1st-gen technology will appear in the
future, who knows?

While the eneloop, and other low self-discharge cells, solve one of the
major problems with NiMH cells, they still have most of the drawbacks
of AA cells in general, and NiMH cells in particular.


Still better than Li-chemistry cells with their high self-discharge
rate,


Li-Ion and Li-Po packs are only a little worse than eneloops in terms of
self-discharge. I.e. in 100 days, the eneloop cells will be around 90%
and the Li-Ion will be at around 80%. ANiMH would be at around 10%.

The lifespan of a Li-Ion pack is a little less in terms of time, but you
get far more cycles from each cell. The charging is more complex, but
the complexity is taken care of for you in the charger and the
protection circuit, temp sensor (and sometimes the micro-controller) in
the battery pack.

The list of advantages and disadvantages is as follows:

20 Advantages of Li-Ion Batteries over NiMH Batteries

1. Much lower self-discharge rate (except for newer Hybrio and eneloop
NiMH cells, which trade low self-discharge for lower capacity)
2. More charge/discharge cycles
3. Usage pattern and charge regimen is better suited to digital cameras
(and other devices where the usual pattern is partial discharge/full charge)
4. Self-Discharge rate is constant during the life of the battery (NiMH
batteries steadily increase in self-discharge over the life of the battery)
5. Greater energy density by weight
6. Greater energy density by volume (AA batteries are not practical for
sub-compact and ultra-compact cameras because of size, and AAA batteries
are not practical because of capacity)
7. Greater number of shots per WH
8. Faster shot to shot times, especially when using flash
9. More convenient to swap and charge than AA cells (no fumbling with
multiple cells, and keeping track of which battery is in which set)*
10. Far better cold weather performance
11. Far better performance at high temperatures
12. Devices using Li-Ion batteries are more reliable than devices using
AA batteries (unlikely to have a battery door flip open and have the
batteries scatter all over)*
13. Li-Ion batteries can be left in devices that are not used for long
periods of time
14. Li-Ion batteries have protection circuitry built into the pack and
do not rely on the charger for this protection
15. Accurate charge level gauge is included in most Li-Ion powered
cameras, but is not possible in NiMH powered cameras (low-battery
indicator only)
16. Li-Ion batteries do not suffer from polarity reversal
17. Li-Ion batteries do not suffer from the "dud" cell problem
18. No need to "Battery Match" cells of similar capacity
19. Rechargeable battery and charger come with the camera, versus buying
a charger and batteries for an AA powered camera
20. Smaller and lighter chargers

* This advantage is over AA batteries in general, not specifically NiMH
AA batteries. The advantage applies to AA batteries of other types as
well (Alkaline, Lithium, etc.).

8 Advantages of NiMH Batteries over Li-Ion Batteries

1. Li-Ion packs are proprietary, you can't substitute disposable AA
cells if your battery goes dead in the middle of nowhere, and you have
no spare battery, and no AC or DC power for charging*
2. Longer shelf life*
3. Faster charging (though high-rate charging significantly reduces
battery life)
4. AA cells will always be available, while less popular Li-Ion packs
may be discontinued*
5. Multiple devices that use AA or AAA cells can share batteries and
chargers (though there are Li-Ion chargers that can charge many
different battery types by the use of adapter plates)*
6. NiMH AA cells can be charged from a 5 volt USB port, while larger
Li-Ion packs (7.4V) cannot.
7. You can buy NiMH batteries at a good price from stores like Wal-Mart
and Fry's but for Li-Ion you must order the battery packs from an
on-line retailer that specializes in batteries in order to obtain good
quality packs at good prices.
8. Hot Shoe Flash and Camera Can Use the Same Type of Battery

generally limited operating lifespan and their finicky charging
and temperature requirements. They also don't store well -- I bought a
laptop once, surplus but still sealed in its box and unopened. The
brand-new Li battery pack was dead on arrival, failing to take a charge.
The battery pack had a date code on the case indicating it had been
built only two years before.


Two years of unused storage is an eternity for a Li-Ion battery, and
also for a NiMH battery. I have some non eneloop NiMH cells that I
bought and was not religious about keeping charged. I tried to use them
last month. They are all now bad. They were in storage for about two
years. My fault. I have an AA trickle charger that I built and I didn't
have the batteries on it.

More information is available at "http://batterydata.com/".


That's your vanity website, yes?


No. Every statement on that site has been fact-checked nine ways to
Sunday. Early-on there were a few corrections that I made after people
e-mailed me, but no one has found any errors in the site for more than a
year. Some of the costs may have changed a bit, but that's about it.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Comment on the old Canon EOS-10D [email protected] Digital Photography 2 October 10th 07 05:07 PM
Off topic comment. William Graham 35mm Photo Equipment 0 July 29th 06 05:11 AM
No comment :) RichA Digital SLR Cameras 5 April 25th 05 08:06 PM
D70 comment Paul Fedorenko Digital Photography 32 December 9th 04 04:08 PM
New website - comment please Hanno Langenhoven (Obenbosch Photography) Photographing Nature 2 October 29th 03 09:00 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.