«

Hi,

I got a small no-frill 3 megapixels DSC-334 digital camera with a built-in
lithium-polymer battery. Owner's manual says it could take hundred of
pictures on a full charge because of its low power CMOS imager.
I just got the camera yesterday, recharged it and I could only take about 65
photos. Flash always off, auto-switch off set to one minute.

Do I have to deplete the battery a couple of times (and recharge it of
course) to get it to full capacity. I believe this is the way with Ni-Cad or
Ni-Mh but what about lithium-polymer?

M.S.

"M. Smile" <> schreef in bericht news:R47He.5119$...
> Hi,
>
> I got a small no-frill 3 megapixels DSC-334 digital camera with a built-in
> lithium-polymer battery. Owner's manual says it could take hundred of
> pictures on a full charge because of its low power CMOS imager.
> I just got the camera yesterday, recharged it and I could only take about 65
> photos. Flash always off, auto-switch off set to one minute.
>
Claims of manifacturers and actual mileage often varies.
The manifacturer will make a claim for the optimal circumstances
for the battery power. They know what those circumstances are,
sometimes they are even mentioned in the manual.

I think that the auto-switch off on one minute and taking the pictures
more than a minute apart is far from optimal. Switching of the camera
immediatly after taking the picture, or making the pictures at a certain
time difference (for example every 7.3453987 seconds) might be an
optimal circumstance.
(Also reducing of the focusing, saving in a minimum format might
make that you can take more pictures on a single load, it might also
depend on the memory card.).

ben brugman


> Do I have to deplete the battery a couple of times (and recharge it of
> course) to get it to full capacity. I believe this is the way with Ni-Cad or
> Ni-Mh but what about lithium-polymer?
>
> M.S.
>
>

"Ben Brugman" <> wrote in message
news:jr-...
>
> "M. Smile" <> schreef in bericht
> news:R47He.5119$...
>> Hi,
>>
>> I got a small no-frill 3 megapixels DSC-334 digital camera with a
>> built-in
>> lithium-polymer battery. Owner's manual says it could take hundred of
>> pictures on a full charge because of its low power CMOS imager.
>> I just got the camera yesterday, recharged it and I could only take about
>> 65
>> photos. Flash always off, auto-switch off set to one minute.
>>
> Claims of manifacturers and actual mileage often varies.
> The manifacturer will make a claim for the optimal circumstances
> for the battery power. They know what those circumstances are,
> sometimes they are even mentioned in the manual.
>
> I think that the auto-switch off on one minute and taking the pictures
> more than a minute apart is far from optimal. Switching of the camera
> immediatly after taking the picture, or making the pictures at a certain
> time difference (for example every 7.3453987 seconds) might be an
> optimal circumstance.
> (Also reducing of the focusing, saving in a minimum format might
> make that you can take more pictures on a single load, it might also
> depend on the memory card.).
>
> ben brugman
>
>
>> Do I have to deplete the battery a couple of times (and recharge it of
>> course) to get it to full capacity. I believe this is the way with Ni-Cad
>> or
>> Ni-Mh but what about lithium-polymer?
>>

Mmmh! 7.3453987 seconds?
I can only go up to four significative digits whatever time difference is
optimal. Sorry I can't keep up with this!

But seriously, you got two points here: the picture format and turning off
manually the camera after taking a picture.
I agree that the minimal format would probably increase the battery life and
the manufacturer probably did his "tests" with that format.

Still! How about the battery recharge cycle (for a new camera)?

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 12:34:59 -0400, in rec.photo.digital "M. Smile"
<> wrote:

>I got a small no-frill 3 megapixels DSC-334 digital camera with a built-in
>lithium-polymer battery. Owner's manual says it could take hundred of
>pictures on a full charge because of its low power CMOS imager.
>I just got the camera yesterday, recharged it and I could only take about 65
>photos. Flash always off, auto-switch off set to one minute.

Is the camera set to continuously auto focus? If so this is a large power
drain. I would then recommend setting to single AF where you would then
focus by half pressing the shutter button.
----------
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photog...ral/index.html

"Ed Ruf" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 12:34:59 -0400, in rec.photo.digital "M. Smile"
> <> wrote:
>
>>I got a small no-frill 3 megapixels DSC-334 digital camera with a built-in
>>lithium-polymer battery. Owner's manual says it could take hundred of
>>pictures on a full charge because of its low power CMOS imager.
>>I just got the camera yesterday, recharged it and I could only take about
>>65
>>photos. Flash always off, auto-switch off set to one minute.
>
> Is the camera set to continuously auto focus? If so this is a large power
> drain. I would then recommend setting to single AF where you would then
> focus by half pressing the shutter button.

This is a P&S fixed focus camera.
The only things I can turn off is the flash (no need to keep its capacitor
charged when not needed) and its 1.5" LCD.
I don't know if such a small LCD can drain that much power to make a
difference.

M.S.

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 16:32:53 -0400, M. Smile wrote:

>>> I got a small no-frill 3 megapixels DSC-334 digital camera with a built-in
>>> lithium-polymer battery. Owner's manual says it could take hundred of
>>> pictures on a full charge because of its low power CMOS imager.
>>> I just got the camera yesterday, recharged it and I could only take about
>>>65 photos. Flash always off, auto-switch off set to one minute.
>>
>> Is the camera set to continuously auto focus? If so this is a large power
>> drain. I would then recommend setting to single AF where you would then
>> focus by half pressing the shutter button.

> This is a P&S fixed focus camera.
> The only things I can turn off is the flash (no need to keep its capacitor
> charged when not needed) and its 1.5" LCD.
> I don't know if such a small LCD can drain that much power to make a
> difference.

LCD displays use a *lot* of battery power, even small ones.
You're better off keeping it disabled unless you really want to
review pictures. Then you should be able to take more than 100
pictures. Your wording wasn't clear. Did the manual say "a hundred
pictures" or "hundreds of pictures"? Either way, off the display.

"ASAAR" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 16:32:53 -0400, M. Smile wrote:
>
>>>> I got a small no-frill 3 megapixels DSC-334 digital camera with a
>>>> built-in
>>>> lithium-polymer battery. Owner's manual says it could take hundred of
>>>> pictures on a full charge because of its low power CMOS imager.
>>>> I just got the camera yesterday, recharged it and I could only take
>>>> about
>>>>65 photos. Flash always off, auto-switch off set to one minute.
>>>
>>> Is the camera set to continuously auto focus? If so this is a large
>>> power
>>> drain. I would then recommend setting to single AF where you would then
>>> focus by half pressing the shutter button.
>
>> This is a P&S fixed focus camera.
>> The only things I can turn off is the flash (no need to keep its
>> capacitor
>> charged when not needed) and its 1.5" LCD.
>> I don't know if such a small LCD can drain that much power to make a
>> difference.
>
> LCD displays use a *lot* of battery power, even small ones.
> You're better off keeping it disabled unless you really want to
> review pictures. Then you should be able to take more than 100
> pictures. Your wording wasn't clear. Did the manual say "a hundred
> pictures" or "hundreds of pictures"? Either way, off the display.

This is a more precise source for the stuff under the hood. They say 180
photos with the LCD and strobe (flash) 100% use. Mmmmh!

http://www.smalcamera.com/up5lcd.html

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 17:31:11 -0400, "M. Smile" <>
wrote:

>
>"ASAAR" <> wrote in message
>news:.. .
>> On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 16:32:53 -0400, M. Smile wrote:
>>
>>>>> I got a small no-frill 3 megapixels DSC-334 digital camera with a
>>>>> built-in
>>>>> lithium-polymer battery. Owner's manual says it could take hundred of
>>>>> pictures on a full charge because of its low power CMOS imager.
>>>>> I just got the camera yesterday, recharged it and I could only take
>>>>> about
>>>>>65 photos. Flash always off, auto-switch off set to one minute.
>>>>
>>>> Is the camera set to continuously auto focus? If so this is a large
>>>> power
>>>> drain. I would then recommend setting to single AF where you would then
>>>> focus by half pressing the shutter button.
>>
>>> This is a P&S fixed focus camera.
>>> The only things I can turn off is the flash (no need to keep its
>>> capacitor
>>> charged when not needed) and its 1.5" LCD.
>>> I don't know if such a small LCD can drain that much power to make a
>>> difference.
>>
>> LCD displays use a *lot* of battery power, even small ones.
>> You're better off keeping it disabled unless you really want to
>> review pictures. Then you should be able to take more than 100
>> pictures. Your wording wasn't clear. Did the manual say "a hundred
>> pictures" or "hundreds of pictures"? Either way, off the display.
>
>This is a more precise source for the stuff under the hood. They say 180
>photos with the LCD and strobe (flash) 100% use. Mmmmh!
>
>http://www.smalcamera.com/up5lcd.html
>
Sony, being the designer/manufacturer of the camera, will know a lot
more about this camera than they will tell us.
One of those things is the exact use that will provide the most shots
per charge.
As was already pointed out, they will advertise an optimal number,
based not on typical use, but on optimal use, and squeezing the
absolutely maximum number of shots, including waiting after the camera
stops to let the battery rest, and then getting more.
Their methods will not be the way a normal user would use, but they
make for good advertising.

As for letting the batteries 'work in' for a few cycles, I don't know
about that particular type.
In any case, I wouldn't expect to get the advertised maximum out of
anything I bought.

--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
funktionality.blogspot.com

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 15:35:53 -0700, Bill Funk wrote:

> Sony, being the designer/manufacturer of the camera, will know a lot
> more about this camera than they will tell us.
> One of those things is the exact use that will provide the most shots
> per charge.
> As was already pointed out, they will advertise an optimal number,
> based not on typical use, but on optimal use, and squeezing the
> absolutely maximum number of shots, including waiting after the camera
> stops to let the battery rest, and then getting more.
> Their methods will not be the way a normal user would use, but they
> make for good advertising.

Some cameras really do get the stated number of pictures. Not
advertised, I don't think, but my Fuji 5100's manual claims 200
pictures using alkaline AAs and 400 using NiMH. It's unfortunate
that all manufacturers don't use comparable methods to determine
battery life but that appears to be changing. According to the
manual, Fuji used the CIPA (Camera and Imaging Products Association)
standard test procedure. It said in part:

> Pictures should be taken at a temperature of 23 °C (+73 °F) with the
> LCD monitor/Viewfinder (EVF) turned on, the optical zoom moved
> from full wide angle to full telephoto (or vice-versa) and back again
> to its original position every 30 seconds, the flash used at full power
> every second shot and the camera turned off and then on again every
> 10 shots.
> • Note: Because the number of available shots varies depending on the
> capacity of alkaline batteries or the level of charge in NiMH batteries,
> the figures shown here for the number of available shots using batteries
> are not guaranteed.
> The number of shots will also decline at low temperatures.

I tested the camera using the supplied alkaline AA batteries (not
the super alkalines provided with some other cameras, but standard
Panasonic AAs, the same as sold in supermarkets) trying to match the
procedure, and got a slightly greater number of shots (IIRC about
212) before the camera shut down - following the second level
battery warning. And then, as I've mentioned before, with the flash
disabled, was able to take more than 400 additional pictures using
the same depleted batteries over the next couple of days.


> As for letting the batteries 'work in' for a few cycles, I don't know
> about that particular type.
> In any case, I wouldn't expect to get the advertised maximum out of
> anything I bought.

I've only heard that advice applied to NiMH batteries, and I
suppose it's true, but maybe only for batteries that have been on
the shelf for an extended period before their first charge. I've
tested many NiMH batteries over the years, in particular for initial
capacity in sizes ranging from 1,300 mah to 2,500 mah, and have
always gotten close to the full capacity on the initial charge.

But as far as getting the advertised maximum stated in ads, I've
often gotten far more when the copy was attempting to be fair and
honest. Case in point - I bought a very cheap Philips portable
radio in Sears about 8 years ago because an ad label claimed that
the 2 D cells it used would last 400 hours. I tested this at home
using a moderate volume. Probably lower than most people would want
to use outdoors, but more than loud enough to hear clearly indoors
within about 20 feet of the radio. The standard alkaline D cells
lasted nearly 1,600 continuous hours. If used only during business
hours (40 hour week), that's most of a year. See, I do occasionally
buy more than just gardening tools.

>>>Do I have to deplete the battery a couple of times (and recharge it of
>>>course) to get it to full capacity. I believe this is the way with Ni-Cad
>>>or
>>>Ni-Mh but what about lithium-polymer?
>>>
>
>
> Mmmh! 7.3453987 seconds?
> I can only go up to four significative digits whatever time difference is
> optimal. Sorry I can't keep up with this!
>
> But seriously, you got two points here: the picture format and turning off
> manually the camera after taking a picture.
> I agree that the minimal format would probably increase the battery life and
> the manufacturer probably did his "tests" with that format.

FWIW, there does exist several industry "standards" for determining
battery life. Of course the standard that each camera manufacturer
follows is up to them, or they ay decide to develop their own method.

The standards are listed here:

http://www.i3a.org/pdf/DigitalCamera...yStandards.pdf

The one most relevant appears to be the CIPA standard, which has a test
procedure that actually involves using the camera (setting and resetting
zoom, taking 10 or so frames with the flash, powering off, powering back
on, resetting the zoom, etc.), as opposed to other stadards hich focus
on testing battery life by applying simulated current draws. As cameras
and batteries differ, CIAP seems to be the closest to providing some
"real world" data.

> Still! How about the battery recharge cycle (for a new camera)?

The jury seems to be out on LiIon. Most people say you need to
completely harge the battery, then almost deplete the battery, then
recharge again, to get the best performance, and then afterwards it
doesn't matter. Others say it doesn't matter, ever. I've done both on
varying models of LiION batteries (cell phone, laptop and digital
camera) and haven't really noticed a difference either way.



--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.