Lithium AA[A] bateries

There are rechargeable CR-V3 lithium batteries around. They might be a better deal than the single use AA ones, if your camera can take them. Personally I'm using Duracell 2.65AH NiMH AA cells with great success.

Bob

**Back when I purchased my second digital still camera (1999), it was fitted with a rechargeable Li-Ion battery pack. Whilst the battery was very compact and light, I was surprised that the manufacturer (Sony) rated the battery for an incredible 1,100 shots, between recharges. A touch optimistic, but experience taught me that around 400-500 shots was certainly possible. At the time I spoke to a friend who owned a similar camera (Kodak), which was fitted with NiCads or alkalines. He managed less than 30 shots between recharges. My most recent camera (2003 model) is fitted with a similar Li-Ion battery, but it is somewhat larger. I recharge the thing, maybe, twice per year. I suspect self-discharge is more of an issue than power consumption of the camera itself.

All the cameras mentioned use(d) CCD sensors. I understand that CMOS sensors do not have the same peak current requirements and NiMH, Ni Cads and alkalines may last longer. For me though, Li-Ion batteries rule. I would suggest you at least try a set of Lithium batteries. They certainly seem to work very well in high peak drain devices.

Trevor Wilson

Lithium Iron Disulphide batteries under "normal" conditions will give about a 50% increase in capacity, with a 300% increase in cost over alkalines.

You do the math.

Where they excel, is either very long shelf life, or, abnormal environmental conditions (freezing temperature conditions).

Since I'm guessing your mouse doesn't experience either, I would say stick to alkalines/rechargeables.

It really doesn't makes sense that your mouse needs new batteries every three weeks or so (and more often than tradition NiCad/LiIon), sounds very fishy. What kind of wireless mouse are we talking here? Or do you have perpetual RSI in your mouse hand from its continual use?

Without "fixing" the problem, rechargeables (NiCad/NiMH) are better value for money over their life than alkalines.

--
Linux Registered User # 302622

"David Segall"

** See:

** Energiser L91s will work much better than any AA alkaline in a digital camera - the extra time & steadier voltage will cover the increased purchase cost.

But *rechargeable* NiMH cells are in a class of their own, with similar mAh capacity and steady voltage performance to the non-rechargeable L91s.

Eg:

...... Phil

Entirely agree. I'd like to add that in my experience, NiMH cells have a much higher rate of self-discharge than lithiums, and Energizer

2.5AH ones (allegedly re-badged Sanyos) are considerably worse than Duracell 2.65AH. A while back, a batch of defective Energizer 2.5AH cells hit the market. Unfortunately I got some of them. They'd be completely flat within 4 days of fully charging them (just sitting open-circuited, not installed in anything).

Bob

Sanyo ENELOOP are the best AA batteries, very low self discharge.

Depends on how often you use them. The Lithium AA's are very good (you might typically get more shots than a top quality set of NiMH's), but they are non-rechargeable and expensive. IMHO they are only good if you use your camera very infrequently (say once a month for a few dozens shots) and want it "ready to go" at a moments notice. If you use it every weekend then forget Lithiums, get NiMH. NiCd's and Alkaline are useless in cameras, don't even bother.

If you want rechargables but use your camera less frequently, then get the newer Eneloop NIMH's. A much longer shelf life at the expense of some capacity.

Dave.

Do you put your mouse in a briefcase. Once the bottom face of the mouse is off a surface (loose in a briefcase for example) the led system will go to full brightness and the battery life will be reduced.