Batteries and the Kodak DC290
Patrick S Kavanagh
rechargeable batteries had been used up the first time I resorted to
using the Alkalines that came with it, made by Kodak, while the others
were being recharged.
After about fifteen minutes of use,with the LCD on, the camera gave me
a 'battery low' message.
I checked the batteries with a battery tester and they showed full.
The camera still would not work with them.
I feel sure that there is a scientific explanation for this but I
don't know what it is. Does anyone know?
Regards,
Patrick.
Frank S
designed to be used with Alkalines prohibit the use of rechargeable
batteries (mainly NICADs) because Nicads deliver much more current than
Alkalines and can damage a circuit that is not designed to take that much
current. You might want to make sure the rechargeables you were using are
acceptable for use in your DC290.
-Frank
Patrick S Kavanagh <cn...@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:385fb97...@news.dircon.co.uk...
B. Olfers
circuitry, generally any application which is designed for Alkaline will
work fine with NiCd or NiMH batteries.
The reason why Alkalines give a "low battery" warning quite soon is the fact
that the high power drain causes the voltage to drop below 1.1V after a few
captures and at this voltage level the camera 'assumes' that the batteries
are empty.
NiCd's and NiMH's however have a very flat discharge curve and hold their
voltage longer to a level of somewhere between 1.1 and 1.2 V, therefor they
perform better in very high current drain applications such as digicams.
However, most times the alkalines are not completely discharged after being
used in a camera, and you probably can still use them for some time in low
current applications.
(I have written a camera-battery FAQ with more tips and info, you can find
it at my Dimage EX1500 website)
Bart Olfers
"The unofficial Minolta Dimage EX1500 website"
http://www.olfe.demon.nl/minolta/
Frank S <fse...@uswest.net> schreef in berichtnieuws
3GP74.225$On3....@news.uswest.net...
Frank S
prohibited the use of NICADs due to the fact that the flash would draw too
much current through them.
I've also had flash units that would accept either NICADs or Alkalines.
When I used Alkalines I got a higher number of flashes per set but a longer
recycle time. When I used NICAD's I got noticeably faster recycling but a
lower number of total flashes. This seems to coincide with the more current
theory of greater current capability resulting in faster recycle times but
faster discharge.
-Frank
B. Olfers <olf...@geocities.com> wrote in message
news:945804253.21284....@news.demon.nl...
jp34med3
my 290 - I only use NiMH rechargeables (check Thomas Distributing for batts
and chargers) and find I get 270+ pics (using flash) with each set of NiMH
batts. Alkalines lose their peak voltage faster than most rechargeables and
soon you have 4 batteries with a combines voltage lower than the camera
requires. Get soem good rechargeables and a good charger - you'll be much
more satisfied. The only reasonable non-rechargeable (except for expense)
would be lithiums - but they cost a lot.
Stan Peters
So voltage is too low to run the camera. But they will
still be useful in flashlights or toys.
Even ordinary NiCads would be better than alkys.
You can buy expensive nonrechargeable AA lithiums
that will work well.
If I were using alkys, I would avoid using the LCD,
except for a quick peek to see if the photo is OK.
bob dolson
> rechargeable batteries had been used up the first time I resorted to
> using the Alkalines that came with it, made by Kodak, while the others
> were being recharged.
> After about fifteen minutes of use,with the LCD on, the camera gave me
> a 'battery low' message.
> I checked the batteries with a battery tester and they showed full.
> The camera still would not work with them.
> I feel sure that there is a scientific explanation for this but I
> don't know what it is. Does anyone know?
> Regards,
> Patrick.
Yes, alkalines do not have the high current capacity that nicad or nimh
rechargables have. So even though their 'open circuit' voltage tests ok,
when they are actually used in the camera with it's high current draws, the
cell voltage drops below what the camera requires.
--
Happy Holidays!
Bob Dolson
Retired as of Oct. 1, 1999!
check out our web pages when you get a chance at:
http://home.sprynet.com/~bdolson
Also check out our new PhotoPoint web albums at:
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=49802
Bill Stephens
Olfers batteries only attempt to deliver the current requirements of the
circuits they are used with. The issue here is that the circuitry in
question (the flash or other high current systems in the camera) wants to
draw more current than the batteries can handle with their relatively high
internal resistance. This is a property of alkaline batteries.
Alkalines work best in circuits where the current draw is low. In a low
current application the internal resistance of the battery does not play as
large a role.
In a high current situation, such as mentioned in the original poster's
note, the current the circuit is trying to draw acting across the high
internal resistance of the alkalines does drop the output voltage of the
battery - hence the low battery warning. Note: This is a dynamic situation,
in that the battery output voltage only drops when the current is being
actually demanded by the circuit. That's why when you remove the battery and
test it - it yields normal voltage - because working into an ohmmeter
there's negligible current draw.
It's just ohm's law at work.
Hope that helps.
Bill Stephens
"Frank S" <fse...@uswest.net> wrote in message
news:AfR74.262$On3....@news.uswest.net...
Frank S
Semantics.
I was simply pointing out that NICADs are capable of providing more current
to the circuit than alkalines. Admittedly the circuit has to demand it. I
did not mean to infer that the batteries could just "pump" the current in.
But the fact remains that there are some devices designed for Alkalines that
can be damaged if NICADs are used. That is my only point.
> It's just ohm's law at work.
I know Mr. Ohm very well after 15 years as a Test Measurement and Diagnostic
Equipment technician.
-Frank
Bill Stephens
explanation of what's going on. I think Frank and I are saying the same
thing here. From an engineering standpoint, low power supply source
impedance (low battery internal resistance in this case) is almost always
desireable. The NimH batts provide this better than the alkalines. As
mentioned before - in a circuit that doesn't need as much current the
alkalines would likely do better.
I don't know about scientific, but I thought the original post was asking
for the technical reasons why the alkalines didn't work as well. That's what
I tried to provide.
Bill
<nobody> wrote in message news:3863434c...@news.mindspring.com...
> back to the question of the original post:
nobody
Patrick S Kavanagh
Good old Newsgroups!
I now have several sets of rechargeable NiMh batteries and will only
use Alkalines when the need arises, such as when I go to Thailand next
year and I get caught without a set of rechargeables.
Happy Christmas to you all!
Patrick.
On Tue, 21 Dec 1999 19:07:02 -0500, "bob dolson" <bdo...@sprynet.com>
wrote:
>
>Patrick S Kavanagh <cn...@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:385fb97...@news.dircon.co.uk...
>> I recently purchased a Kodak DC290 Digital Camera and after the
>> rechargeable batteries had been used up the first time I resorted to
>> using the Alkalines that came with it, made by Kodak, while the others
>> were being recharged.
>> After about fifteen minutes of use,with the LCD on, the camera gave me
>> a 'battery low' message.
>> I checked the batteries with a battery tester and they showed full.
>> The camera still would not work with them.
>> I feel sure that there is a scientific explanation for this but I
>> don't know what it is. Does anyone know?
>> Regards,
>> Patrick.
>
Dean Sensui
the LCD is on. Your batteries may test OK with a basic tester, but that
won't simulate their actual condition when heavy amperage is being drawn.
it'll probably run a radio or other such equipment fairly well, but not a
digital camera.
Stick with the NiMH batteries. you'll get good mileage out of them. Thomas
Distributing has good prices on batteries and chargers, and their
batteries perform nicely. I don't have their URL right off hand but can
look it up later on.
Dean.
In article <385fb97...@news.dircon.co.uk>, cn...@dircon.co.uk (Patrick
Lou
http://thomas-distributing.com/maha-aa-t.htm
Stan Peters
more cost effective tha alkalines. check your manual.
Lou
Unless they really changed the 290 from the 260, I know that the 260
drained regular alkaline batteries in less than 15 shots.
Check out the site below for using RC batteries;
http://www.idrive.com/skamradt/Web/DC265BATTERY.html
You may also be able to use some long shelf life dry cell batteries.
On Sun, 02 Jan 2000 06:06:15 GMT, spe...@kdsi.net (Stan Peters)
wrote:
rsh...@optonline.net
cameras (as well as other digital cameras). For a look see www.qtm.com.
Regards,
Rick
Dean Sensui wrote:
> The Kodak 290 and other digital cameras draw qujite a bit of power when
> the LCD is on. Your batteries may test OK with a basic tester, but that
> won't simulate their actual condition when heavy amperage is being drawn.
>
> it'll probably run a radio or other such equipment fairly well, but not a
> digital camera.
>
> Stick with the NiMH batteries. you'll get good mileage out of them. Thomas
> Distributing has good prices on batteries and chargers, and their
> batteries perform nicely. I don't have their URL right off hand but can
> look it up later on.
>
> Dean.
>
> In article <385fb97...@news.dircon.co.uk>, cn...@dircon.co.uk (Patrick
SteveR
wrote:
>> The batteries don't "deliver" too much current.
>
>Semantics.
No it's not. The point that you're all missing is that the
rechargeables have lower internal resistance than the alkalines. The
voltage measured at the terminals under load is a result of the EMF of
the chemical system, minus the current drawn times the internal
resistance. Even though the EMF is higher in an alkaline system, the
resistance is also higher, thus, depending on the nature of the load,
the terminal voltage can fall to quite low values, despite the
"capacity" of the cell remaining high.
Typically, flash units draw current in narrow, high-amplitude pulses.
With a high internal resistance, the current is limited to relatively
low values, so the recycle rate of the flash is slower. With NiCds
the internal resistance is considerably lower so the flyback circuit
in the flash unit can deliver much more energy to the capacitor in a
given pulse, thus the shorter recycle time. Also, the lower internal
resistance of NiCds can potentially deliver so much current that the
swithing transistor in the flyback circuit could conceivably be
damaged. I'd say that this is evidence of a very poor design, but
that's another issue altogether.
SteveR
m.a.i.l.t.o.:
s.r.r.2 a.t r.c.n d.o.t c.o.m