Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > How many mA, peak, do digital cameras draw from Photo Lithium batteries?

Reply
Thread Tools

How many mA, peak, do digital cameras draw from Photo Lithium batteries?

 
 
fancy nospam tunes
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-03-2005
Anybody ever measure what cameras, including cameras with LCD screens,
draw from 223, CR-V3, or CCR-P2 photo lithiums?

Also, is there a reason why camera manufacturers use different sizes
of these lithium batteries?

Also, if the battery specification states "10 mA" draw, why is it that
(allegedly) some cameras draw 1,000 mA from the battery?

Thanks for all replies.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Al Dykes
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-03-2005
In article <(E-Mail Removed)> ,
fancy nospam tunes <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Anybody ever measure what cameras, including cameras with LCD screens,
>draw from 223, CR-V3, or CCR-P2 photo lithiums?
>
>Also, is there a reason why camera manufacturers use different sizes
>of these lithium batteries?
>
>Also, if the battery specification states "10 mA" draw, why is it that
>(allegedly) some cameras draw 1,000 mA from the battery?
>
>Thanks for all replies.



The full specs are a set of graphs for a range of current and time.
Look at the make and model on your lithium cell and google for
specifications.

The camera has peak current requirements when taking a shot with
flash, a medium demand for a shot w/o flash, and an idle current when
on but sleeping. One amp when recharghing the flash and writing the
prior shot to the CF card doesn't seems unreasonable.



--

a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m

Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Harvey
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-03-2005

"fancy nospam tunes" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) m...
> Anybody ever measure what cameras, including cameras with LCD screens,
> draw from 223, CR-V3, or CCR-P2 photo lithiums?
>
> Also, is there a reason why camera manufacturers use different sizes
> of these lithium batteries?
>
> Also, if the battery specification states "10 mA" draw, why is it that
> (allegedly) some cameras draw 1,000 mA from the battery?
>
> Thanks for all replies.


1,000 mA draw is not unreasonable. Camera engineers will work with battery
engineers to use whatever batteries will fit the application and be
available in general commerce. Each manufacturer will use what best fits
his particular application. the 10 mA draw is one test method for
batteries. Roughly speaking a 2,000 mAh rated battery will last 200 hours
with a 10 mA load. The same battery would last 2 hours with a 1,000 mA
load. The most common test charging current and test load current for
batteries is C/10 that is for a 2,000 mAh battery it would be 200 mA.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Henry Law
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-03-2005
On 3 Jan 2005 07:57:28 -0500, http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) (Al Dykes) wrote:

>The full specs are a set of graphs for a range of current and time.
>Look at the make and model on your lithium cell and google for
>specifications.


I Googled extensively but found only details of the capacity of the
*battery*, not the current demand from the *camera*.

I posted on rec.photo.digital.slr-systems on a similar topic earlier
today; decided not to cross-post to here I'm wondering whether
one could build an AC adapter and what current it would have to
supply; also what the "B" anbd "D" terminals do.
--

Henry Law <>< Manchester, England
 
Reply With Quote
 
Kevin McMurtrie
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-03-2005
In article <(E-Mail Removed)> ,
(E-Mail Removed) (fancy nospam tunes) wrote:

> Anybody ever measure what cameras, including cameras with LCD screens,
> draw from 223, CR-V3, or CCR-P2 photo lithiums?
>
> Also, is there a reason why camera manufacturers use different sizes
> of these lithium batteries?
>
> Also, if the battery specification states "10 mA" draw, why is it that
> (allegedly) some cameras draw 1,000 mA from the battery?
>
> Thanks for all replies.


The camera only draws high currents when it's busy doing something like
encoding a JPEG, manipulating the sensor data, driving the LCD, or
charging the flash. Peaks over 1 Amp are common. Idle currents of 1mA
are typical too.

Each battery has a rate at which its chemical reaction can take place.
Attempting to exceed that rate causes the voltage to drop and the
battery to generate heat. A camera can momentarily draw high currents
as long as there's a rest period for the battery to catch up. Some
cameras, like the Oly C series, will turn on fewer components of the
camera at once if it detects the battery voltage sagging.

Alkaline batteries are quite slow, which is why cameras tend to suddenly
power off while using them. NiCd is the fastest, some being able to
dump most of their power in under one minute. Newer NiMH batteries can
handle 30 minute discharge rates efficiently enough but they're better
at 2-4 hour rates. Lithium batteries vary enormously depending on make
and chemistry. I don't know what it is for camera batteries because I
haven't seen specifications posted.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-04-2005
fancy nospam tunes wrote:
> Anybody ever measure what cameras, including cameras with LCD screens,
> draw from 223, CR-V3, or CCR-P2 photo lithiums?
>
> Also, is there a reason why camera manufacturers use different sizes
> of these lithium batteries?
>
> Also, if the battery specification states "10 mA" draw, why is it that
> (allegedly) some cameras draw 1,000 mA from the battery?
>
> Thanks for all replies.


This was posted to this group a while back:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Canon 10D power consumption
Date: 12 Nov 2004 10:09:48 -0800
From: (E-Mail Removed)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital

(Tried to post this yesterday. It's not in google, so once again...)

Here are some current measurements of a Canon 10D. The power supply
was a single, full-charge, 3rd party BP-511, 8.2V. Various
operations:

off 0mA (probably something in the microamp area)

idle 98mA

active 406mA (shutter half-press; exposuring ongoing)
388mA (no shutter button contact)
421mA IS only \
672mA IS + AF > shutter half-pressed
665mA AF only /

AF measurements are "peak".

imaging 1150mA (peak - _very_ brief)

editing 250mA/315mA \ LCD bright
233mA |
214mA >
195mA |
186mA/250mA / LCD dim

writing 150mA (with bursts of 220mA)

bulb 345mA (holding the shutter open in 'bulb' exposure)

The lens was an EF 500/4, but others (EF 20/2.8, EF 300/4) didn't
change much. Note the relatively low impact of using IS, and the
large impact of the AFing (the lens was racking from close to
infinity). Also note the low image write current.

Peak current of 1.15A was measured during a 9 "raw" frame pipeline
fill/drain episode. This peak was unaffected by IS or AF, suggesting
that it is still an underestimate (unlikely given the Fluke meter I
was using), or that AF (the larger of the two) is briefly disabled
during mirro flip, shutter open, etc. Note that the act of taking a
picture should demand a fair amount of energy given how fast these
moving parts are moving.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Frank ess
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-04-2005
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote:
> fancy nospam tunes wrote:
>> Anybody ever measure what cameras, including cameras with LCD
>> screens, draw from 223, CR-V3, or CCR-P2 photo lithiums?
>>
>> Also, is there a reason why camera manufacturers use different sizes
>> of these lithium batteries?
>>
>> Also, if the battery specification states "10 mA" draw, why is it
>> that (allegedly) some cameras draw 1,000 mA from the battery?
>>
>> Thanks for all replies.

>
> This was posted to this group a while back:
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Canon 10D power consumption
> Date: 12 Nov 2004 10:09:48 -0800
> From: (E-Mail Removed)
> Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
>
> (Tried to post this yesterday. It's not in google, so once again...)
>
> Here are some current measurements of a Canon 10D. The power supply
> was a single, full-charge, 3rd party BP-511, 8.2V. Various
> operations:
>
> off 0mA (probably something in the microamp area)
>
> idle 98mA
>
> active 406mA (shutter half-press; exposuring ongoing)
> 388mA (no shutter button contact)
> 421mA IS only \
> 672mA IS + AF > shutter half-pressed
> 665mA AF only /
>
> AF measurements are "peak".
>
> imaging 1150mA (peak - _very_ brief)
>
> editing 250mA/315mA \ LCD bright
> 233mA |
> 214mA >
> 195mA |
> 186mA/250mA / LCD dim
>
> writing 150mA (with bursts of 220mA)
>
> bulb 345mA (holding the shutter open in 'bulb' exposure)
>
> The lens was an EF 500/4, but others (EF 20/2.8, EF 300/4) didn't
> change much. Note the relatively low impact of using IS, and the
> large impact of the AFing (the lens was racking from close to
> infinity). Also note the low image write current.
>
> Peak current of 1.15A was measured during a 9 "raw" frame pipeline
> fill/drain episode. This peak was unaffected by IS or AF, suggesting
> that it is still an underestimate (unlikely given the Fluke meter I
> was using), or that AF (the larger of the two) is briefly disabled
> during mirro flip, shutter open, etc. Note that the act of taking a
> picture should demand a fair amount of energy given how fast these
> moving parts are moving.


Very interesting.

Do you suppose Canon pays any attention to these? Would the functions
have been optimised to minimize energy use, or just developed and the
draw falls where it may? Is it likely any significant changes would be
apparent in the presumably "improved" 20D?

I suppose one could "port, polish, airflow, balance", and otherwise
blueprint the mechanics of a camera.


--
Frank ess


 
Reply With Quote
 
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-05-2005
Frank ess wrote:

> Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote:
>
>>fancy nospam tunes wrote:
>>
>>>Anybody ever measure what cameras, including cameras with LCD
>>>screens, draw from 223, CR-V3, or CCR-P2 photo lithiums?
>>>
>>>Also, is there a reason why camera manufacturers use different sizes
>>>of these lithium batteries?
>>>
>>>Also, if the battery specification states "10 mA" draw, why is it
>>>that (allegedly) some cameras draw 1,000 mA from the battery?
>>>
>>>Thanks for all replies.

>>
>>This was posted to this group a while back:
>>
>>-------- Original Message --------
>>Subject: Canon 10D power consumption
>>Date: 12 Nov 2004 10:09:48 -0800
>>From: (E-Mail Removed)
>>Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
>>
>>(Tried to post this yesterday. It's not in google, so once again...)
>>
>>Here are some current measurements of a Canon 10D. The power supply
>>was a single, full-charge, 3rd party BP-511, 8.2V. Various
>>operations:
>>
>>off 0mA (probably something in the microamp area)
>>
>>idle 98mA
>>
>>active 406mA (shutter half-press; exposuring ongoing)
>> 388mA (no shutter button contact)
>> 421mA IS only \
>> 672mA IS + AF > shutter half-pressed
>> 665mA AF only /
>>
>>AF measurements are "peak".
>>
>>imaging 1150mA (peak - _very_ brief)
>>
>>editing 250mA/315mA \ LCD bright
>> 233mA |
>> 214mA >
>> 195mA |
>> 186mA/250mA / LCD dim
>>
>>writing 150mA (with bursts of 220mA)
>>
>>bulb 345mA (holding the shutter open in 'bulb' exposure)
>>
>>The lens was an EF 500/4, but others (EF 20/2.8, EF 300/4) didn't
>>change much. Note the relatively low impact of using IS, and the
>>large impact of the AFing (the lens was racking from close to
>>infinity). Also note the low image write current.
>>
>>Peak current of 1.15A was measured during a 9 "raw" frame pipeline
>>fill/drain episode. This peak was unaffected by IS or AF, suggesting
>>that it is still an underestimate (unlikely given the Fluke meter I
>>was using), or that AF (the larger of the two) is briefly disabled
>>during mirro flip, shutter open, etc. Note that the act of taking a
>>picture should demand a fair amount of energy given how fast these
>>moving parts are moving.

>
>
> Very interesting.
>
> Do you suppose Canon pays any attention to these? Would the functions
> have been optimised to minimize energy use, or just developed and the
> draw falls where it may? Is it likely any significant changes would be
> apparent in the presumably "improved" 20D?
>
> I suppose one could "port, polish, airflow, balance", and otherwise
> blueprint the mechanics of a camera.
>
>

Since battery life is an issue, I bet they have improved these
numbers on newer cameras, but then they process data faster,
so it may be a wash.

Roger

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: How include a large array? Edward A. Falk C Programming 1 04-04-2013 08:07 PM
Cameras--Cameras--Cameras wagwheel Digital Photography 4 04-01-2007 01:12 PM
Digital Photography RFD: rec.photo.digital.slr vs rec.photo.digital.slr-systems? Lionel Digital Photography 16 09-17-2004 12:48 PM
People with both pocket digital cameras & bigger digital cameras zxcvar Digital Photography 12 01-04-2004 02:38 AM
Current draw of digital cameras Iconoclast Digital Photography 3 12-20-2003 04:01 AM



Advertisments