I have a Canon Powershot A10. It takes 2 AAs, rechargeables recommended and always used. When I first got it I could take lots of pictures on a charge, at least 100, maybe 200. Now after only 30-50 pictures it is saying the batteries are dead.
When the camera says the batteries are dead, they still read 1.27 volts. To fully charge them my charger is putting about 730 mAh into each. These batteries are rated 2 Ah - 2.5 Ah. So it seems clear that the camera is misreading their charge somehow. The camera is fairly new, I’ve had it less than a year and taken less than 1000 pictures with it.
Anybody have any ideas about what could be causing this or what I can do about it?
That’s a good guess. Just to eliminate another possibility: is it possible you used to be taking more outdoor pictures, but lately you’ve been using the flash more?
I thought the ‘charge memory’ effect was greatly exaggerated, and not really something to worry about. Do you have a source for this?
Which is not to say that rechargeable batteries last forever; so they could be the problem (and easy enough to test).
One other possibility, though, is that you’re leaving the camera on for longer. Actually taking a picture doesn’t use up that much power, compared to lighting up the screen on the back. So just turning the camera on and leaving it on will run down the batteries fairly quickly. (If battery charge is an issue, always turn off the display on your digital camera).
Actually, rechargeable are much better for digital cameras than alkalines. Sometimes on the order of 4-5 times (in my experience) longer life than non-rechargeables. NiMH batteries are not supposed to have “memory.” Are the batteries relatively new, and how long after recharge do you use them? I recharge my batteries the night before use and, once again in my experience, I’ll get maybe 200-250 frames from alkalines vs. 1000+ frames from my rechargeables in a single, intensive 8-hour time frame of use. The one thing rechargeables are not very good at is holding their power levels through a prolonged length of time between recharges.
I can’t believe you get that many pictures out of a set of batteries, period (edit: the original claim of 1-200 pictures). Maybe digital camera battery usage has become a lot more efficient in the last few years, but my Olympia digital camera eats AA’s like candy.
Another edit: I assumed this issue was common with digital cameras…is it not?
Alkalines or NiMHs? If alkalines, I can believe it. If NiMHs, that’s surprising. Like I said, I get over 1000 frames on a full recharge, but that was on a camera (Nikon D200, which I no longer use) that takes 6 AAs at once.
I always used alkalines. The wife and I generally don’t use the camera much, but now that we have a teenaged daughter, well…let’s just say the AA battery budget has quadrupled at least.
I also always kinda assumed rechargeable batteries were more of a pain in the ass than they were worth…is that not longer so (if ever)?
Maybe I should invest in some for my camera…it might save me a fortune!
This is a good point, sometimes they do sit for several weeks before use, and also for several weeks in the camera after installation. However, I have tried Sanyo Eneloops, which are advertised to not lose power while sitting in a drawer, and they are no better.
Also, it seems to me that the fact that these batteries are reading 1.27 volts when the camera says they are dead points to some deeper problem. Rechargeables are only supposed to be 1.2 volts; when they first come off the charger they are more like 1.4. If I’m not mistaken, the camera’s battery gauge is just reading the voltage (indicated by the fact that the batteries are always at exactly 1.27 when the camera refuses to take any more pictures.) Why would the camera, expecting rechargeables at 1.2 volts, say they are dead when they are at 1.27? Makes no sense.
I will buy some new batteries and see if there is any improvement. Anybody have a recommendation for which brand is the best?
I hate to always preface everything I say with “in my experience”, but, yes, I think you should. I am not exaggerating in the least when I say my D200 lasts 4-5 times longer on a fresh set of rechargeables vs. alkalines. The only problem with rechargeables is you have to keep on top of them. They tend to lose .5-1% of their charge per day (from what I remember reading). I’ll try to dig up some sources, but I remember reasearching this issue when I couldn’t figure out why the NiMHs were lasting much longer than alkalines, and it turned out for devices like digital cameras, this was typical, with some people claiming up to 10x the output of alkalines.
In my experience, rechargeables are well worth the money, IF you buy a good charger. If you buy the $10 Energizer charger then you will be pouring money down the drain. This is the charger I use and it does a pretty good job. I’m sure I’ve saved hundreds of dollars on batteries for my kids’ toys.
Also, because of differences in the way alkalines discharge under use vs. the way rechargeables do, cameras that are set up to expect rechargeables will sometimes indicate that alkaline batteries are dead when they really have up to half their power remaining.
I hear the Eneloops are great, but I personally use the highest capacity Energizers I can find (looks like 2450 mAh from looking at my batteries). PowerEx are also a very reputable brand that people love, and that I’ve used in the past to great successs.
I will also recommend Maha/PowerEx brand rechargers. Website here. They are extremely popular among me and my colleagues in the professional photographer circle. That said, I’ve had good luck even with the Energizer 15-minute quick rechargers, which are supposed to be hell on your batteries.
Can certain or newer/older models of cameras have vastly different levels of power consumption? I’d have to assume that while newer technologies are more efficient in general, the gizmos that keep getting added to gadgets like these invariably must up the power usage.