Long life!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by steve@tropheus.demon.co.uk, Sep 20, 2006.

  1. Guest

    I have had a Nikon Coolpix 2100 for years but have not used it much
    because of its pathetically short battery charge life. It put me off
    digital photography but I have decided to try again. First move is to
    replace the Coolpix 2100. Most modern cameras are at least as good as
    the Coolpix 2100 for all features and they must have better battery
    life.

    All I want is a reasonably good digital camera with a long battery
    life.

    Any recommendations?

    Steve

    --
    Steve Wolstenholme Neural Planner Software

    EasyNN-plus. The easy way to build neural networks.
    http://www.easynn.com
     
    , Sep 20, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. jeremy Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I have had a Nikon Coolpix 2100 for years but have not used it much
    > because of its pathetically short battery charge life. It put me off
    > digital photography but I have decided to try again. First move is to
    > replace the Coolpix 2100. Most modern cameras are at least as good as
    > the Coolpix 2100 for all features and they must have better battery
    > life.
    >
    > All I want is a reasonably good digital camera with a long battery
    > life.
    >
    > Any recommendations?
    >


    DSLR. Much more like film SLRs in terms of no/low shutter lag and long
    battery life.
     
    jeremy, Sep 20, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Rudy Benner Guest

    "jeremy" <> wrote in message news:73gQg.28$Kh.1@trnddc05...
    >
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>I have had a Nikon Coolpix 2100 for years but have not used it much
    >> because of its pathetically short battery charge life. It put me off
    >> digital photography but I have decided to try again. First move is to
    >> replace the Coolpix 2100. Most modern cameras are at least as good as
    >> the Coolpix 2100 for all features and they must have better battery
    >> life.
    >>
    >> All I want is a reasonably good digital camera with a long battery
    >> life.
    >>
    >> Any recommendations?
    >>

    >
    > DSLR. Much more like film SLRs in terms of no/low shutter lag and long
    > battery life.
    >


    I can go for several days, hundreds of shots with one battery on my Nikon
    D-50.
    Shutter lag is insignificant and its instant on.
     
    Rudy Benner, Sep 20, 2006
    #3
  4. Bill Funk Guest

    On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 19:33:53 +0100, wrote:

    >I have had a Nikon Coolpix 2100 for years but have not used it much
    >because of its pathetically short battery charge life. It put me off
    >digital photography but I have decided to try again. First move is to
    >replace the Coolpix 2100. Most modern cameras are at least as good as
    >the Coolpix 2100 for all features and they must have better battery
    >life.
    >
    >All I want is a reasonably good digital camera with a long battery
    >life.
    >
    >Any recommendations?
    >
    >Steve


    I don't know what you mean by "pathetically short battery charge life"
    (25 shots? 200 shots?), but most currently marketed digital cameras
    are much more efficient when it comes to battery life than the cameras
    of just a few years ago.
    If you could give us some sort if idea of what you want to use the
    camera for, we could be much more helpfull.
    --
    Bill Funk
    replace "g" with "a"
     
    Bill Funk, Sep 20, 2006
    #4
  5. On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 18:49:39 GMT, in rec.photo.digital "jeremy"
    <> wrote:

    >
    ><> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >>I have had a Nikon Coolpix 2100 for years but have not used it much
    >> because of its pathetically short battery charge life. It put me off
    >> digital photography but I have decided to try again. First move is to
    >> replace the Coolpix 2100. Most modern cameras are at least as good as
    >> the Coolpix 2100 for all features and they must have better battery
    >> life.


    Let me guess you didn't use the camera much, but every time you picked it
    up a month apart the batteries were exhausted?
    --
    Ed Ruf ()
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
     
    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), Sep 20, 2006
    #5
  6. On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 16:36:35 -0400, in rec.photo.digital "Ed Ruf (REPLY to
    E-MAIL IN SIG!)" <> wrote:

    >On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 18:49:39 GMT, in rec.photo.digital "jeremy"
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >><> wrote in message
    >>news:...
    >>>I have had a Nikon Coolpix 2100 for years but have not used it much
    >>> because of its pathetically short battery charge life. It put me off
    >>> digital photography but I have decided to try again. First move is to
    >>> replace the Coolpix 2100. Most modern cameras are at least as good as
    >>> the Coolpix 2100 for all features and they must have better battery
    >>> life.

    >
    >Let me guess you didn't use the camera much, but every time you picked it
    >up a month apart the batteries were exhausted?


    Oops, replied jeremy's reply instead of the OPs' post. Sorry about the
    attributions....
    --
    Ed Ruf ()
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
     
    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), Sep 20, 2006
    #6
  7. Guest

    On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 16:36:35 -0400, "Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN
    SIG!)" <> wrote:

    >On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 18:49:39 GMT, in rec.photo.digital "jeremy"
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >><> wrote in message
    >>news:...
    >>>I have had a Nikon Coolpix 2100 for years but have not used it much
    >>> because of its pathetically short battery charge life. It put me off
    >>> digital photography but I have decided to try again. First move is to
    >>> replace the Coolpix 2100. Most modern cameras are at least as good as
    >>> the Coolpix 2100 for all features and they must have better battery
    >>> life.

    >
    >Let me guess you didn't use the camera much, but every time you picked it
    >up a month apart the batteries were exhausted?


    Not really. Every time it was going to be needed I put the batteries
    on charge the day before.

    Steve
     
    , Sep 20, 2006
    #7
  8. Guest

    On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 13:16:38 -0700, Bill Funk <>
    wrote:

    >On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 19:33:53 +0100, wrote:
    >
    >>I have had a Nikon Coolpix 2100 for years but have not used it much
    >>because of its pathetically short battery charge life. It put me off
    >>digital photography but I have decided to try again. First move is to
    >>replace the Coolpix 2100. Most modern cameras are at least as good as
    >>the Coolpix 2100 for all features and they must have better battery
    >>life.
    >>
    >>All I want is a reasonably good digital camera with a long battery
    >>life.
    >>
    >>Any recommendations?
    >>
    >>Steve

    >
    >I don't know what you mean by "pathetically short battery charge life"
    >(25 shots? 200 shots?), but most currently marketed digital cameras
    >are much more efficient when it comes to battery life than the cameras
    >of just a few years ago.


    5 to 10 shots.

    Steve
     
    , Sep 20, 2006
    #8
  9. BD Guest

    >
    > 5 to 10 shots.
    >
    > Steve


    If the camera had some kind of 'Auto' mode, and you walked around with
    the lens cap off on your shoots, that may account for some of the
    battery exhaustion. Auto mode will continually engage the
    auto-focusing motors, and drain the batteries in no time.

    My Coolpix 4500 does that.

    Just something to keep in mind.
     
    BD, Sep 20, 2006
    #9
  10. Bill Funk Guest

    On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 22:49:23 +0100, wrote:

    >On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 13:16:38 -0700, Bill Funk <>
    >wrote:
    >
    >>On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 19:33:53 +0100, wrote:
    >>
    >>>I have had a Nikon Coolpix 2100 for years but have not used it much
    >>>because of its pathetically short battery charge life. It put me off
    >>>digital photography but I have decided to try again. First move is to
    >>>replace the Coolpix 2100. Most modern cameras are at least as good as
    >>>the Coolpix 2100 for all features and they must have better battery
    >>>life.
    >>>
    >>>All I want is a reasonably good digital camera with a long battery
    >>>life.
    >>>
    >>>Any recommendations?
    >>>
    >>>Steve

    >>
    >>I don't know what you mean by "pathetically short battery charge life"
    >>(25 shots? 200 shots?), but most currently marketed digital cameras
    >>are much more efficient when it comes to battery life than the cameras
    >>of just a few years ago.

    >
    >5 to 10 shots.
    >
    >Steve


    That's not a characteristic of the camera.
    It could be bad batteries, or it could be user error (was the camera
    left on with auto focus on?). Or even a defective camera.
    But the rest still goes.
    What are you intending to do wit the camera? Travel, portraits,
    advertising shots?
    --
    Bill Funk
    replace "g" with "a"
     
    Bill Funk, Sep 21, 2006
    #10
  11. Guest

    On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 19:04:27 -0700, Bill Funk <>
    wrote:

    >On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 22:49:23 +0100, wrote:
    >
    >>On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 13:16:38 -0700, Bill Funk <>
    >>wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 19:33:53 +0100, wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>I have had a Nikon Coolpix 2100 for years but have not used it much
    >>>>because of its pathetically short battery charge life. It put me off
    >>>>digital photography but I have decided to try again. First move is to
    >>>>replace the Coolpix 2100. Most modern cameras are at least as good as
    >>>>the Coolpix 2100 for all features and they must have better battery
    >>>>life.
    >>>>
    >>>>All I want is a reasonably good digital camera with a long battery
    >>>>life.
    >>>>
    >>>>Any recommendations?
    >>>>
    >>>>Steve
    >>>
    >>>I don't know what you mean by "pathetically short battery charge life"
    >>>(25 shots? 200 shots?), but most currently marketed digital cameras
    >>>are much more efficient when it comes to battery life than the cameras
    >>>of just a few years ago.

    >>
    >>5 to 10 shots.
    >>
    >>Steve

    >
    >That's not a characteristic of the camera.


    It is according to a few reviews I have found. There are so many
    people trying to sell that it's difficult to find unbiased opinions.

    >It could be bad batteries, or it could be user error (was the camera
    >left on with auto focus on?). Or even a defective camera.


    It's never left on. I've used three pairs of batteries. It could be a
    duff camera but it's one of many.

    >But the rest still goes.
    >What are you intending to do wit the camera? Travel, portraits,
    >advertising shots?


    Nothing specific. I just wanted to take a photo occasionally.

    Steve
     
    , Sep 21, 2006
    #11
  12. wrote:
    : On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 19:04:27 -0700, Bill Funk <>

    : >What are you intending to do wit the camera? Travel, portraits,
    : >advertising shots?

    : Nothing specific. I just wanted to take a photo occasionally.

    This could be part of the problem. non-rechargeables may still have a
    trickle of drain even when some cameras are turned off. So you may want to
    store the batteries outside the camera, but with it so that they can be
    quickly reinstalled when the "occasional" photo opportunity presents
    itself.

    If you are using rechargeables, in or out of the camera most of them tend
    to self discharge over time. Ni-Cad's last very short time in storage.
    NiMh lasts a little longer but still have significant self discharge.

    This is why I personally have switched to Lithium Ion batteries for long
    term use (as opposed to load fresh batteries and shoot until dead).
    Currently I am using the one use ones for my camera, but I have some
    rechargeable ones for other devices and have found that they seem to hold
    a full charge for months.

    So my suggestion, when putting the camera in the drawer, take the
    batteries out incase there is some slight drain (this could effect the
    day/date staying current). And you may want to look into Li-ion cells.
    Then on the occasion when you expect to shoot tons of photos in a short
    time, that would drain several sets of batteries, then charge up several
    sets of rechargeables that can be reused for this use, and then stored
    until the next long shoot. JMHO

    Randy

    ==========
    Randy Berbaum
    Champaign, IL
     
    Randy Berbaum, Sep 21, 2006
    #12
  13. Bill Funk Guest

    On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 09:15:32 +0100, wrote:

    >Nothing specific. I just wanted to take a photo occasionally.
    >
    >Steve


    Well, there are hundreds of cameras out there to choose from.
    You want sugestions, but give no idea of what you want.
    The choices range from the rediculous (how about a Bell & Howell
    "10mp" camera for under $20) to the very, VERY good (top of the line
    DSLRs).
    In that range there's bound to be something you can buy.
    But what? That's up to you.
    Does "occasionally" mean only on holidays, when the family convenes?
    Does it mean you want to document yuour child's growth? Do you want to
    take photography as a hobby? Do you want to document your travels?
    Do you want a small camera? A light one? One for pictures in low
    light? For birds? Wildlife? Wild life in a club?
    What's 'reasonably good'? Do you want photos to email to family and
    friends? Photos to frame for the wall? Photos to put on a place like
    Flickr?

    You're asking the equivilent of, "What car should I get"?
    --
    Bill Funk
    replace "g" with "a"
     
    Bill Funk, Sep 21, 2006
    #13
  14. Mueen Nawaz Guest

    >> I don't know what you mean by "pathetically short battery charge life"
    >> (25 shots? 200 shots?), but most currently marketed digital cameras
    >> are much more efficient when it comes to battery life than the cameras
    >> of just a few years ago.

    >
    > 5 to 10 shots.


    Are you using alkaline batteries?

    --
    C program run, C program crash, C programmer cry.


    /\ /\ /\ /
    / \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
    >>>>>><<<<<<

    anl
     
    Mueen Nawaz, Sep 22, 2006
    #14
  15. Guest

    On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 01:19:21 -0500, Mueen Nawaz <>
    wrote:

    >>> I don't know what you mean by "pathetically short battery charge life"
    >>> (25 shots? 200 shots?), but most currently marketed digital cameras
    >>> are much more efficient when it comes to battery life than the cameras
    >>> of just a few years ago.

    >>
    >> 5 to 10 shots.

    >
    > Are you using alkaline batteries?


    No, lead/acid after they won't start my car :)

    --
    Steve Wolstenholme Neural Planner Software

    EasyNN-plus. The easy way to build neural networks.
    http://www.easynn.com
     
    , Sep 22, 2006
    #15
  16. Dave Cohen Guest

    wrote:
    > On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 01:19:21 -0500, Mueen Nawaz <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>>> I don't know what you mean by "pathetically short battery charge life"
    >>>> (25 shots? 200 shots?), but most currently marketed digital cameras
    >>>> are much more efficient when it comes to battery life than the cameras
    >>>> of just a few years ago.
    >>> 5 to 10 shots.

    >> Are you using alkaline batteries?

    >
    > No, lead/acid after they won't start my car :)
    >

    Steve, nothing gets just 4 or 5 shots something is seriously wrong. NiMH
    do lose their charge with non-use, but I'll still get up to 100 shots
    after camera has sat for about 3 months. Right now I've got 4 not
    particularly good alkalines in the camera as a test, 70 shots so far. If
    a camera using AA's is used very intermittently, the new eneloops look
    to be the answer. I just picked up a set of 4. My camera is canon A95.
    My old A40 got close to 400 shots on a set of NiMH if used within a 3 or
    4 week period.
    As for Lithium Ion, I thought these were rechargeable and not available
    in AA plus voltage is higher. Lithium non-rechargeables are expensive
    and canon says not to use in A40. Might be good to carry as a spares.
    Canon says nothing about them in A95 manual
    Dave Cohen
     
    Dave Cohen, Sep 22, 2006
    #16
  17. Eugene Nine Guest

    Dave Cohen wrote:

    > wrote:
    >> On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 01:19:21 -0500, Mueen Nawaz <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>>> I don't know what you mean by "pathetically short battery charge life"
    >>>>> (25 shots? 200 shots?), but most currently marketed digital cameras
    >>>>> are much more efficient when it comes to battery life than the cameras
    >>>>> of just a few years ago.
    >>>> 5 to 10 shots.
    >>> Are you using alkaline batteries?

    >>
    >> No, lead/acid after they won't start my car :)
    >>

    > Steve, nothing gets just 4 or 5 shots something is seriously wrong. NiMH
    > do lose their charge with non-use, but I'll still get up to 100 shots
    > after camera has sat for about 3 months. Right now I've got 4 not
    > particularly good alkalines in the camera as a test, 70 shots so far. If
    > a camera using AA's is used very intermittently, the new eneloops look
    > to be the answer. I just picked up a set of 4. My camera is canon A95.
    > My old A40 got close to 400 shots on a set of NiMH if used within a 3 or
    > 4 week period.
    > As for Lithium Ion, I thought these were rechargeable and not available
    > in AA plus voltage is higher. Lithium non-rechargeables are expensive
    > and canon says not to use in A40. Might be good to carry as a spares.
    > Canon says nothing about them in A95 manual
    > Dave Cohen


    I have an old HP C500 and if I put put charged NiMH batteries in it and let
    it sit for a couple months it will beep low battery and power off without
    even taking any shots so 4-5 shots for an old camera isn't that far off. I
    finally just started buying lithiums for it and it will run close to 100
    shots from them.
     
    Eugene Nine, Sep 23, 2006
    #17
  18. Eugene Nine Guest

    Randy Berbaum wrote:

    > wrote:
    > : On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 19:04:27 -0700, Bill Funk <>
    >
    > : >What are you intending to do wit the camera? Travel, portraits,
    > : >advertising shots?
    >
    > : Nothing specific. I just wanted to take a photo occasionally.
    >
    > This could be part of the problem. non-rechargeables may still have a
    > trickle of drain even when some cameras are turned off. So you may want to
    > store the batteries outside the camera, but with it so that they can be
    > quickly reinstalled when the "occasional" photo opportunity presents
    > itself.
    >
    > If you are using rechargeables, in or out of the camera most of them tend
    > to self discharge over time. Ni-Cad's last very short time in storage.
    > NiMh lasts a little longer but still have significant self discharge.
    >
    > This is why I personally have switched to Lithium Ion batteries for long
    > term use (as opposed to load fresh batteries and shoot until dead).
    > Currently I am using the one use ones for my camera, but I have some
    > rechargeable ones for other devices and have found that they seem to hold
    > a full charge for months.
    >
    > So my suggestion, when putting the camera in the drawer, take the
    > batteries out incase there is some slight drain (this could effect the
    > day/date staying current). And you may want to look into Li-ion cells.
    > Then on the occasion when you expect to shoot tons of photos in a short
    > time, that would drain several sets of batteries, then charge up several
    > sets of rechargeables that can be reused for this use, and then stored
    > until the next long shoot. JMHO
    >
    > Randy
    >


    Lithium Ion cells are the rechargeable ones, the non rechargeable ones are
    just Lithium.
    Also NiCad have less self discharge than NiMH, they actually last quite a
    long time but don't have quite enough power for a digicam.
    Your advice is correct if you say to use Lithium not lithium ion. Lithium
    AA's have a shelf life of 10 years or more and will last quite a while in a
    digicam, I can take more pics with a Lithium than an NiMH in our old camera
    since the MiMH self discharge too much over a month or so.
     
    Eugene Nine, Sep 23, 2006
    #18
  19. Bill Funk Guest

    On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 09:08:08 -0400, Eugene Nine <> wrote:

    >Dave Cohen wrote:
    >
    >> wrote:
    >>> On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 01:19:21 -0500, Mueen Nawaz <>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>>> I don't know what you mean by "pathetically short battery charge life"
    >>>>>> (25 shots? 200 shots?), but most currently marketed digital cameras
    >>>>>> are much more efficient when it comes to battery life than the cameras
    >>>>>> of just a few years ago.
    >>>>> 5 to 10 shots.
    >>>> Are you using alkaline batteries?
    >>>
    >>> No, lead/acid after they won't start my car :)
    >>>

    >> Steve, nothing gets just 4 or 5 shots something is seriously wrong. NiMH
    >> do lose their charge with non-use, but I'll still get up to 100 shots
    >> after camera has sat for about 3 months. Right now I've got 4 not
    >> particularly good alkalines in the camera as a test, 70 shots so far. If
    >> a camera using AA's is used very intermittently, the new eneloops look
    >> to be the answer. I just picked up a set of 4. My camera is canon A95.
    >> My old A40 got close to 400 shots on a set of NiMH if used within a 3 or
    >> 4 week period.
    >> As for Lithium Ion, I thought these were rechargeable and not available
    >> in AA plus voltage is higher. Lithium non-rechargeables are expensive
    >> and canon says not to use in A40. Might be good to carry as a spares.
    >> Canon says nothing about them in A95 manual
    >> Dave Cohen

    >
    >I have an old HP C500 and if I put put charged NiMH batteries in it and let
    >it sit for a couple months it will beep low battery and power off without
    >even taking any shots so 4-5 shots for an old camera isn't that far off. I
    >finally just started buying lithiums for it and it will run close to 100
    >shots from them.


    Except that Steve (the OP) says that is with fresh batteries.
    Definitely not normal.
    --
    Bill Funk
    replace "g" with "a"
     
    Bill Funk, Sep 23, 2006
    #19
  20. Guest

    On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 08:12:19 -0700, Bill Funk <>
    wrote:

    >On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 09:08:08 -0400, Eugene Nine <> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>I have an old HP C500 and if I put put charged NiMH batteries in it and let
    >>it sit for a couple months it will beep low battery and power off without
    >>even taking any shots so 4-5 shots for an old camera isn't that far off. I
    >>finally just started buying lithiums for it and it will run close to 100
    >>shots from them.

    >
    >Except that Steve (the OP) says that is with fresh batteries.
    >Definitely not normal.


    They are the rechargeable ones that Nikon recommended. There own make
    EN-MH1 rechargeable 1.2 Volts 2000mAh. I can't find a lithium 1.2
    volt. The camera won't work with any batteries that are slightly above
    or below 1.2 volts. All the non rechargeable AA are too high a
    voltage.

    Steve

    --
    Steve Wolstenholme Neural Planner Software

    EasyNN-plus. The easy way to build neural networks.
    http://www.easynn.com
     
    , Sep 23, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. psion
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    640
    =?ISO-8859-15?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=
    May 18, 2004
  2. jriegle

    Flash memory udeful life and data storage life

    jriegle, Oct 17, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    686
    jriegle
    Oct 17, 2003
  3. Koos Nolst Trenite
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    766
    Dale Houstman
    Aug 28, 2005
  4. 88059355

    Life Balance Coaching: Balance Work And Life Like A Pro

    88059355, Jan 6, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    647
  5. fit0
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,210
Loading...

Share This Page