From: SMS on
y_p_w wrote:

> Actually a 100-240V AC in a low-profile charger. They still sell some
> kits with the larger 110-120V "wall warts".
>
> http://www.thomas-distributing.com/maha-worldadapter.htm
>
> Thomas Distributing now only sells the MH-C401FS with the
> "international" adapter - I think.

Yeah, they should fix there web site to reflect this, as they still
mention the 110-120V only adapter in several places as coming "standard"
with the MH-C401FS
From: mehlREMOVETHIS on
On Jul 12, 7:22 pm, SMS <scharf.ste...(a)geemail.com> wrote:
> y_p_w wrote:
> > Actually a 100-240V AC in a low-profile charger. They still sell some
> > kits with the larger 110-120V "wall warts".
>
> >http://www.thomas-distributing.com/maha-worldadapter.htm
>
> > Thomas Distributing now only sells the MH-C401FS with the
> > "international" adapter - I think.
>
> Yeah, they should fix there web site to reflect this, as they still
> mention the 110-120V only adapter in several places as coming "standard"
> with the MH-C401FS

Thanks for all the contributions. They helped a lot.

Larry Mehl



From: Ron Hunter on
ASAAR wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 17:36:42 GMT, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>
>>> As to batteries, get Eneloop or Hybrio, not standard NiMH.
>>>
>> That completely depends upon usage pattern. If you are travelling and
>> planning to shoot a lot of pictures for instance, the higher capacity standard
>> NiMH (i.e. 2700mAh) might make more sense.
>
> I've told him that for quite some time, but he's stuck in a rut
> with his old anti-NiMH bias. It still shows in that he has yet to
> admit that the Eneloops, Hybrid and Hybrios have lower
> self-discharge rates than Li-Ion, but at least he now doesn't
> dismiss them completely. As you've indicated, for some people,
> usage patterns would make standard NiMH batteries preferable. I see
> nothing wrong with making a general statement that Eneloops might be
> a better choice if you don't know how they'll be used. But if you
> do know, making a choice based on knowledge and not on ignorance
> will always be the smarter way to go.
>

Assuming that the Eneloop and similar batteries perform as advertised
(and user reports seem favorable), then they are preferable over the
standard NiMH type for all but the most sever uses, and certainly better
for the sporadic picture taker. Better than Li-Ion? Not if weight is
an important issue.
From: Ron Hunter on
SMS wrote:
> Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>> SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote:
>>> As to batteries, get Eneloop or Hybrio, not standard NiMH.
>>>
>>
>> That completely depends upon usage pattern. If you are travelling and
>> planning to shoot a lot of pictures for instance, the higher capacity
>> standard
>> NiMH (i.e. 2700mAh) might make more sense.
>
> Yes, this is true. There are some instances where the higher capacity is
> more valuable than the low self-discharge.

I suspect that the actual 'in use' difference between a fully charged
2700mAh NiMH battery and a fully charged Eneloop 2100mAh battery would
be only a few pictures, and then only in those rare cases where one
actually uses a battery to discharge in a single day. Over a couple of
days the slow self-discharge rate of the Eneloop would probably level
the playing field.
From: ASAAR on
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 02:52:44 -0500, Ron Hunter wrote:

> Assuming that the Eneloop and similar batteries perform as advertised
> (and user reports seem favorable), then they are preferable over the
> standard NiMH type for all but the most sever uses, and certainly better
> for the sporadic picture taker. Better than Li-Ion? Not if weight is
> an important issue.

Of course, and I haven't disagreed with that. What SMS has said
many times is that Li-Ion is better than NiMH when compared by
weight and by volume. That's still true for weight, but when
compared by volume, NiMH is practically the equal of Li-Ion, since
the size (volume) of AA cells is pretty constant, but the capacity
has increased by a huge amount, about triple what the first NiMH
batteries could achieve. If you check Energizer's data sheets
you'll see that they rate their own lithium AA cells at 3,000mAh,
not much more than alkaline and NiMH cells. As I've said before,
the lithium cells show no appreciable advantage over alkalines for
very low current devices, such as clocks, smoke detectors and
perhaps even radios, if they're played at very low volume.

Assuming that Li-Ion batteries have the same density as lithium AA
cells, I don't expect to see NiMH batteries compete with Li-Ion
batteries on a weight basis, since to reach parity they'd have to up
their capacity to almost 6,000mAh per cell, and I don't expect to
see that anytime soon, if ever. :)