| Author |
Message |
This old Bob
Guest
|
 Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: incompatible batteries. Scammed again. |
|
|
"Paul Rubin" <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote in message
news:7xoe4qkaph.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com...
| Quote: | "Scott Chapin" <rschapin@comcast.net> writes:
I kind of like the added features, and I don't need a third party
battery,
as I don't need to buy enough for the savings to be material.
The issue is they went out of their way to make the old batteries
incompatible. They could have simply not supported the new features
with the old batteries, as was the case with Sony camcorders for a
while. What I don't know is if the new Nikon batteries work in the
old cameras (D70/D100). It will be really peachy if they're
incompatible in both directions, so if you have a D100 and add a D200
and want to go somewhere with both cameras, you have to bring separate
sets of batteries and maybe even separate chargers for each one.
|
Sounds like the point was they made the battery much better.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Paul Rubin
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: incompatible batteries. Scammed again. |
|
|
"This old Bob" <kilbyfan@spamnotmeAOL.com> writes:
| Quote: | Sounds like the point was they made the battery much better.
|
I don't know that it's so much better. I have a Sony camcorder with
InfoLithium and it has that capacity display that's nowhere near as
accurate as it pretends to be. Simply measuring the voltage works
perfectly well.
Anyway, while the new battery's extra feature may be useful, that's no
reason to prevent use of old batteries without the feature.
I notice they restored metering capability for non-AF lenses, because
people with older Nikon lenses that the D70 couldn't support were
switching to Canon. Well, if you have a D70 or D100 with 3 batteries
and you want 3 batteries for your D200, that's $150 or so worth of
batteries, which is like a lens or flash. Nikon has already had
several incompatible flash systems and they DIDN'T do that again (this
time) with the D200. They're seeing where they can get away with it
and where they can't.
If I get a D200, I'll probably get the AA battery pack (holds six NiMH
cells) even though it makes the camera considerably bigger. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul Rubin
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: incompatible batteries. Scammed again. |
|
|
"A. Longor" <longuriata@green.com> writes:
| Quote: | Now I understand, you're a schnorrer!
|
plonk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul Rubin
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: incompatible batteries. Scammed again. |
|
|
"Scott Chapin" <rschapin@comcast.net> writes:
| Quote: | I'd only have 4. One in each camera and 2 spares. No big deal
|
If you have 4 batteries that are the exact same size and voltage, why
don't you see it as an unnecessary nuisance that you can't use all 4
batteries in both cameras? That's what's baffling me.
| Quote: | Yeah, the AA pack just makes the camera a lot bigger.
It wouldn't be as inconvenient of a spare accessory, as say a charger to
carry around and needing to find an outlet.
|
I dunno, it looks like it makes the camera almost as big as a D2H/X.
Also, I may be confused about this but I think I saw some mention that
it costs around $300. I hope I'm wrong about that.
| Quote: | Well, you shoot differently than me. I don't like being married to a
charger. Besides, why three batteries? When one dies, you put it in the
charger and use the spare. If you burn through the spare before the spent
battery is recharged, you are doing some hellashisly serious shooting!
|
As you say, it's a nuisance to carry a charger and have to find an
outlet. And if the batteries are that long-lasting, why should you
need separate spares for each camera? Two cameras and one spare
should be enough. But nooo, the spare won't work in both cameras.
| Quote: | I've got 5 Sony Cancorders, 3 Pannys, and a Canon. The meters aren't
absolute, but good enough to let me know when I should change batteries.
What do you want mw to tell my cusomers? "Hold on while I field strip my
camera, fetch my VOM and check these batteries out. It will only take a
moment, seriously."
|
The camera should display the voltage, obviously. They usually have
those silly bar graphs instead. But those aren't so much worse than
the microprocessor-type battery meters. I carry cellular phones
around all the time that don't have microprocessors in the battery
packs, and the bar graphs are enough to know when to change batteries.
Anyway, that's what the spare pack (and 2nd camera) are for. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David Dyer-Bennet
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: D200: incompatible batteries. Scammed again. |
|
|
Rich <none@none.com> writes:
| Quote: | On 11 Nov 2005 14:22:12 -0800, Paul Rubin
http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote:
According to Thom Hogan (www.bythom.com) the D200 uses a new EN-EL3e
battery and old EN-EL3's won't work. D70/D100 owners with multiple
EN-EL3's are delighted to hear that, I'm sure. Looks like the
proprietary battery runaround is not slowing down.
So sell the proprietary old ones with your old D series camera
and buy new ones. If you really want to get mad, ask yourself WHY
you had to buy a whole new camera instead of just being able
to upgrade what you have with a sensor swap.
|
Often one keeps the old camera as a secondary or backup.
My previous experience with "smart" batteries, with a friend's Apple
laptop, was absolutely horrid, so I tend to distrust the whole
enterprise. And, like another poster, I suspect the main reason is to
make them harder to compete with, and hence more expensive.
If I do ever buy a D200, it'll be the first camera I've ever bought
that uses proprietary batteries, and I hate making that step.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@dd-b.net>, <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/> |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scott Chapin
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: incompatible batteries. Scammed again. |
|
|
"Paul Rubin" <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote in message
news:7xoe4qkaph.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com...
| Quote: | "Scott Chapin" <rschapin@comcast.net> writes:
I kind of like the added features, and I don't need a third party
battery,
as I don't need to buy enough for the savings to be material.
The issue is they went out of their way to make the old batteries
incompatible. They could have simply not supported the new features
with the old batteries, as was the case with Sony camcorders for a
while. What I don't know is if the new Nikon batteries work in the
old cameras (D70/D100). It will be really peachy if they're
incompatible in both directions, so if you have a D100 and add a D200
and want to go somewhere with both cameras, you have to bring separate
sets of batteries and maybe even separate chargers for each one.
|
I don't see where they have to be compatible. When I get a D200, I will want
new batteries for it anyway. It's not a problem keeping them separate from
my D100 batteries. Now the separate chargers might be an issue, but for me,
I would rather get the battery grips and have some AAs on hand.
I've never had a single battery give out in the course of a day. I have two,
so a charger is not important to me unless I'm gone for days. You're suppose
to get 1200 shots per battery right? I haven't seen where my 70-200 VR sucks
down much juice either.
They didn't go out of their way to make them incompatible. They went out of
their way to make them more useful. A battery meter would let me know just
how far I can go without changing batteries. You know, should I change them
during my break, or do I wait til they crap out? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David J. Littleboy
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: D200 incompatible batteries. Scammed again. |
|
|
"Paul Rubin" <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote:
| Quote: | According to Thom Hogan (www.bythom.com) the D200 uses a new EN-EL3e
battery and old EN-EL3's won't work. D70/D100 owners with multiple
EN-EL3's are delighted to hear that, I'm sure. Looks like the
proprietary battery runaround is not slowing down. The new battery
apparently has a charge level display function like Sony InfoLithium.
That means the battery itself has a microprocessor inside that
undoubtedly sends some secret crap to the camera, shutting out the
third party battery manufacturers and keeping prices high.
|
It's worth it. Knowing how much charge you've got left is wonderful.
Once again, Nikon edges out Canon with worthwhile features (like the grid
lines and spot metering on the D70).
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul Rubin
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: incompatible batteries. Scammed again. |
|
|
"Scott Chapin" <rschapin@comcast.net> writes:
| Quote: | I don't see where they have to be compatible. When I get a D200, I will want
new batteries for it anyway. It's not a problem keeping them separate from
my D100 batteries.
|
Why on earth would you want new ones if you have several perfectly good ones?
| Quote: | Now the separate chargers might be an issue, but for me,
I would rather get the battery grips and have some AAs on hand.
|
Yeah, the AA pack just makes the camera a lot bigger. I'd have liked
it if they made the camera use AA's natively but I'm in a minority on that.
| Quote: | I've never had a single battery give out in the course of a day. I have two,
so a charger is not important to me unless I'm gone for days.
|
I like having at least 3 batteries, so I can have one battery in the
camera, one on the charger, a charged spare in the camera bag. With
two cameras, why should I need SIX batteries?
| Quote: | You're suppose to get 1200 shots per battery right? I haven't seen
where my 70-200 VR sucks down much juice either.
|
That 1200 shots per battery seems to only apply if you just click away
without using AF much, without using the LCD much, without using the
built-in flash, etc.
| Quote: | They didn't go out of their way to make them incompatible. They
went out of their way to make them more useful.
|
Uh, no. Preserving compatibility means just not turning on the extra
feature in the camera unless the battery supports it.
Anyway, the proof of the pudding will be in whether 3rd party vendors
start offering low priced batteries compatible with the new system
quickly.
| Quote: | A battery meter would let me know just how far I can go without
changing batteries. You know, should I change them during my break,
or do I wait til they crap out?
|
If you've ever used a Sony camcorder, you'll know that the battery
meter is better than nothing but it's not THAT reliable. Simply
displaying the battery voltage under load gives you a pretty good
sense of the charge state. 8.4 volts = fully charged, 7.2 volts =
getting low, below 7 volts = swap it out. No microprocessor needed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David J. Littleboy
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: incompatible batteries. Scammed again. |
|
|
"Paul Rubin" <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote:
| Quote: | "This old Bob" <kilbyfan@spamnotmeAOL.com> writes:
Sounds like the point was they made the battery much better.
I don't know that it's so much better.
|
Neither do I. They _might_ have messed up the implementation. But...
| Quote: | I have a Sony camcorder with
InfoLithium and it has that capacity display that's nowhere near as
accurate as it pretends to be. Simply measuring the voltage works
perfectly well.
|
The readout on the S85 and F707 was simply wonderful. It gave a very good
rough estimate to how much you had left. If it said roughly 1/3 full, it
really was.
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rich
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: D200: incompatible batteries. Scammed again. |
|
|
On 11 Nov 2005 14:22:12 -0800, Paul Rubin
<http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote:
| Quote: | According to Thom Hogan (www.bythom.com) the D200 uses a new EN-EL3e
battery and old EN-EL3's won't work. D70/D100 owners with multiple
EN-EL3's are delighted to hear that, I'm sure. Looks like the
proprietary battery runaround is not slowing down.
|
So sell the proprietary old ones with your old D series camera
and buy new ones. If you really want to get mad, ask yourself WHY
you had to buy a whole new camera instead of just being able
to upgrade what you have with a sensor swap.
-Rich |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul Rubin
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: incompatible batteries. Scammed again. |
|
|
"David J. Littleboy" <davidjl@gol.com> writes:
| Quote: | The readout on the S85 and F707 was simply wonderful. It gave a very good
rough estimate to how much you had left. If it said roughly 1/3 full, it
really was.
|
Try leaving the camera in the bag for a couple months and see if it's
still so accurate.
Anyway, I don't understand why you keep rationalizing this. Sure, the
battery meter is a swell feature if your batteries support it. That
doesn't justify removing support for the old batteries for people who
don't need the battery meter. The only reason to do that is to force
users to buy new batteries that they otherwise might not want, and
also to keep them away from 3rd party vendors. Imagine how much of
the DSLR market Nikon would have kept if it used a lens mount
incompatible with its 35mm AF lens system.
Next thing I'll want to know is whether they messed with the RAW
format again, to prevent dcraw from reading the NEF files. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul Rubin
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:41 am Post subject:
Re: D200: incompatible batteries. Scammed again. |
|
|
Rich <none@none.com> writes:
| Quote: | So sell the proprietary old ones with your old D series camera
and buy new ones. If you really want to get mad, ask yourself WHY
you had to buy a whole new camera instead of just being able
to upgrade what you have with a sensor swap.
|
I don't think swapping sensors in this level of camera is technically
feasible. It would make the camera a lot more complex and expensive.
That's much different from this battery issue. I would, however, like
to see various sensor configurations available on these cameras. For
example I'd like to see a monochrome DSLR in the D70 or D200 price class.
I certainly did get mad when the D70 didn't support exposure metering
with MF lenses. The D200 fixes that and that's the main reason the
D200 interests me.
Old batteries don't have much resale value either. It's sort of like
buying dairy products at a garage sale.
I don't know the resale value of a D70 or D100 these days but I'll
guess either one is in the $500 range, while a new D200 will be about
$1700. So that's $1200 extra expenditure, plus the hassle of selling
your old stuff, if you want a two-camera system with two D200's
instead of a D200 and your old D70/D100. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scott Chapin
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:41 am Post subject:
Re: incompatible batteries. Scammed again. |
|
|
"Paul Rubin" <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote in message
news:7x4q6iheys.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com...
<SNIP>>
| Quote: | Why on earth would you want new ones if you have several perfectly good
ones?
|
I'd only have 4. One in each camera and 2 spares. No big deal
<SNIP>
| Quote: | Yeah, the AA pack just makes the camera a lot bigger. I'd have liked
it if they made the camera use AA's natively but I'm in a minority on
that.
|
It wouldn't be as inconvenient of a spare accessory, as say a charger to
carry around and needing to find an outlet.
<SNIP>
| Quote: | I like having at least 3 batteries, so I can have one battery in the
camera, one on the charger, a charged spare in the camera bag. With
two cameras, why should I need SIX batteries?
|
Well, you shoot differently than me. I don't like being married to a
charger. Besides, why three batteries? When one dies, you put it in the
charger and use the spare. If you burn through the spare before the spent
battery is recharged, you are doing some hellashisly serious shooting!
<SNIP>
| Quote: |
If you've ever used a Sony camcorder, you'll know that the battery
meter is better than nothing but it's not THAT reliable. Simply
displaying the battery voltage under load gives you a pretty good
sense of the charge state. 8.4 volts = fully charged, 7.2 volts =
getting low, below 7 volts = swap it out. No microprocessor needed.
|
I've got 5 Sony Cancorders, 3 Pannys, and a Canon. The meters aren't
absolute, but good enough to let me know when I should change batteries.
What do you want mw to tell my cusomers? "Hold on while I field strip my
camera, fetch my VOM and check these batteries out. It will only take a
moment, seriously."
Scott Chapin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul Rubin
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:41 am Post subject:
Re: incompatible batteries. Scammed again. |
|
|
"Scott Chapin" <rschapin@comcast.net> writes:
| Quote: | I kind of like the added features, and I don't need a third party battery,
as I don't need to buy enough for the savings to be material.
|
The issue is they went out of their way to make the old batteries
incompatible. They could have simply not supported the new features
with the old batteries, as was the case with Sony camcorders for a
while. What I don't know is if the new Nikon batteries work in the
old cameras (D70/D100). It will be really peachy if they're
incompatible in both directions, so if you have a D100 and add a D200
and want to go somewhere with both cameras, you have to bring separate
sets of batteries and maybe even separate chargers for each one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skip M
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Nov 14, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: incompatible batteries. Scammed again. |
|
|
"ASAAR" <caught@22.com> wrote in message
news:mtbfn1po53n0eeb0kt0boe2oh8fnki3kc0@4ax.com...
| Quote: | On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 12:18:34 -0800, Skip M wrote:
The BP-511 used in the D30 etc. is a physically bigger battery and I
can understand why they used a smaller one in the XT/350D since they
were trying to make those cameras as small as they could.
I'm wondering how long a 750 mh (IIRC) battery will last in a camera with
the capabilities of the RebelXT/360D and especially when used with Canon
IS
lenses. The 1300mh BP511 gets about 6-800 images per charge in the 20D,
I
wonder about cutting the battery capacity by about 40% to save a couple
of
millimeters...
Just because saving a couple of millimeters was one design goal,
one can't assume that limiting battery capacity wasn't another.
There are at least three reasons I can think of why the small
battery might help Canon's long term bottom line. How many can you
think of?
That, I think, was the point of the original, Nikon based post. And that |
would be the only reason to put a smaller, non compatible battery in there.
To get me to buy yet more batteries. But the flaw in that is that there's
no assurance that I will buy Canon batteries. In fact, in many cases, it
pretty much assures the opposite.
--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in