From: ASAAR on
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 07:53:16 -0700, SMS wrote:

>>> 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.
> Yes, maybe I should have said "rare instances" rather than "some instances."

Cases where it's not so rare would be when used in portable audio
equipment where speakers are used instead of earphones (radios, CD
players, etc.), since it wouldn't be unusual at all to need to
recharge the batteries every day or two, depending on volume and how
many hours the devices are used per day. For external speedlights
such as Nikon's SB-800, 2,700mAh batteries would be much preferred
over Eneloops unless they're used for only a small number of shots.

From: Thomas T. Veldhouse on
SMS <scharf.steven(a)> wrote:
> Maha boasts about the MH-C9000 "Endless programming possibilities - over
> 10,000 ways!" and "29 selectable charging and discharging rate <sic>." I
> know that you can just go to automatic mode and not worry about choosing
> one of the more than 10,000 configurations, but then what's the point of
> spending that much? I don't think I'd spend the time to do battery
> matching and grouping, cycling, or forming charges. I wouldn't use the
> high charge rates because, according to the experts, high temperature
> kills batteries. I wouldn't want to do the automatic cycling, since the
> number of cycles of NiMH batteries are so limited.

I do use the features and I do group the batteries [especially important for
non-voltage limited devices like flashlights]. I do use the cycling when I
run accross a battery that just doesn't hold its charge for long. If you are
faced with a battery that is growing unusable because of the increased
self-discharge, than cycling is a great way to recover some of its potential;
thus it is not wasting any cycles. Further, 500 to 1000 charges is a LOT of
charges for the $10 you pay for four batteries these days.

> Read the fifth paragraph at ""

I have read this article before. There is nothing new here and certainly
nothing that refutes anything posed in this thread.

Thomas T. Veldhouse

We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the
machinations of the wicked.

From: SMS on
Ron Hunter wrote:

> I use a small inverter I got at Sam's for $10 and which puts out 90
> watts. I have run my laptop on it for hours, WHILE CHARGING and a full
> charge only took a couple of hours. The inverter wasn't even warm at
> the end. This certainly is cheaper than paying $100 for the HP version
> of a car charger!

I paid $55 for a universal iGo charger (wall/car/airplane) that works
with two of my HP systems. I'm not sure the airlines would like you
using an inverter on the EmPower system, but in any case, it's one less
thing to carry when traveling.

I have an inverter from Costco (80W) and it can't power the 65W adapter
on a Dell laptop. I just bought an 120W inverter yesterday at Costco,
but haven't tried it.
From: Thomas T. Veldhouse on
SMS <scharf.steven(a)> wrote:
> Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>> The Costco in Coon Rapids, MN. They carry both the Duracell and the Sony
>> charger. They are a few feet apart in the aisle ... oddly, not directly
>> adjacent to each other.
> I was in Costco yesterday (Sunnyvale, CA), and they had neither charger.
> Maybe they are phasing out the Duracell, but haven't gotten the Sony yet.

They were selling Duracell as the "quick charger" and Sony as the higher
capacity slower charger with "conditioning". I am certain your Costco carries
it, and most likely they just moved it somewhere else like they are so prone
to do.

Thomas T. Veldhouse

We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the
machinations of the wicked.

From: ASAAR on
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:44:21 GMT, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:

>> The car outlet can supply about 120 watts in most cars, are you saying
>> the performance is better on the 401FS with an inverter and the AC
>> supply, than it is directly from the car with the DC cord?
> Where did you get that from? No. My inverter has a 60W sustained power and
> 75W peak power rating IIRC. I use it to charge all sorts of batteries [via an
> AC plug] such as the LiIon for my D200 camera. That charger is not much
> different in size than my MH-C401FS, which incidentally has its own car
> adapter.
>>> In my opinion, screw USB for the vast majority of charging uses not excepting
>>> NiMH batteries.
>> USB chargers make it one (or many) less things to carry when traveling.
>> They're great for MP3 players, PDAs, and phones, and acceptable for NiMH
>> batteries, though not optimal. Some point and shoot cameras charge the
>> Li-Ion battery directly from USB, in-camera, though not many.
> No it doesn't, it requires you to carry a laptop or other USB supply. If you
> already carry one, you still need AC power to the laptop to charge batteries
> via USB ... unless you really don't care about the power in your laptop battery
> ;-)

Since you already have an inverter it wouldn't be necessary to
carry a bulky laptop just to get a USB power supply. The small,
inexpensive Duracell AA/AAA NiMH charger I mentioned previously
could be used since it also has a USB charging port. That is, it
provides power to USB devices, it's not powered by USB. :)