[Date Prev][Date
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date
Index][Thread Index]
RE: Re: Battteries...
- To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: Re: Battteries...
- From: "Phillip Harris" <phillip.harris1@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 20:31:08 +0100
- Delivered-to: rich@xxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: mailing list ukha_d@xxxxxxx
- Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact
ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
- Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Good thinking ... something that I had completely overlooked.
Phil
> -----Original Message-----
> From: patrickl@xxxxxxx [mailto:patrickl@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: 28 March 2001 20:27
> To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> Subject: [ukha_d] Re: Battteries...
>
>
> > The reason I ask is that I'm looking to make up a high capacity
> power pack
> > for a very current hungry digital camera and their D size
alkaline
> cells are
> > rated at 18,000mAh as compared with a typical 1,600mAh for a
> rechargeable AA
> > set. Of course they're not rechargeable but with ten times the
> battery life
> > then I'm happy to accept that the batteries are thrown away if it
> means an
> > uninterrupted day of shooting!
>
> Be aware that the electrical characteristics of NiCd (if that's what
> you currently use) vs. disposable cells are such that they may not
> actually be suitable for digital camera use.
> I had a (now defunct) digital camera which used 2xAA nicd cells. The
> camera would not work properly with dry cells. I think this may have
> been due to the fact that alkaline dry cells are unable to supply the
> high transient peak currents which NiCd cells can. I don't pretend to
> be an expert on battery technology and no doubt someone else will be
> along shortly who can elaborate further/rubbish my theory. I guess if
> you know your current camera works with conventional dry cells ok,
> you are unlikely to have a problem.
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index
|