Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 17 May 2017 (Wednesday) 23:21
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3rd Party batteries and 5D4

 
John ­ from ­ PA
Cream of the Crop
8,005 posts
Likes: 488
Joined May 2003
Location: Southeast Pennsylvania
     
Jul 20, 2017 16:53 |  #76

Ascenta wrote in post #18406877 (external link)
Oh my god is this alice in wonderland???? Or is everyone just tripping on LSD? Obviously a lying cheat. I'm pretty sure someone else would call them out before me on a $3000 camera. Go take a look at all the complaining in the 6D2 thread. Canon would be crucified for that big of a lie.

I have NO IDEA why people are ok with this. Putting a total of 1300-1400mAh cells in a pack and calling it 2600mAh is not a "defect". Do you really believe that? It's the EXACT same thing as you mentioned here if Canon actually published specs of 1/8000 in the manual, online, everywhere, but actually built it to do 1/4000. Exact same thing.

A defect would be a problem with the battery housing causing it to not physically fit. Or a broken tab on the battery that didn't make contact. Or solder than came loose inside. I understand that; it happens on $1000 TVs and $30,000 cars all the time. But to build a 1300mAh battery pack then market it and sell it as 2600mAh is ludicrous.

The determination of battery capacity is not an easy task, and cannot be accomplished in the manner in which you are testing. I suggest you review the content at http://mathscinotes.co​m …ery-capacity-versus-load/ (external link) for some insight into the complexity of the task. When a manufacturer tests and labels batteries, something so simple as the end point voltage (per cell) will have a serious impact on the nominal capacity. One manufacturer might use an end point voltage of 3.2 volts, the other 3.0

I'd also like to point out that the capacity on the label, and the method for its determination, changed in August 2015 as part of the regulations covering the shipment of Li-Ion batteries on aircraft. Before August 7, 2015, shippers in the US measured the power of lithium batteries by “equivalent lithium content”, a simple method based on weight. Under the new rules, battery power is expressed in watt-hours, something directly related to mAh as labeled on the battery. This is the number that goes on the battery label.

Another resource worth reviewing is at http://batteryuniversi​ty.com …g_lithium_based​_batteries (external link).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Ascenta
Senior Member
Avatar
483 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 188
Joined Sep 2005
     
Jul 20, 2017 18:37 |  #77

Since I decided I'm not paying full price for an OEM, I'll just deal with this. But I'll try the wasabi brand next time. I'm expecting the same tactics, but maybe I'll be surprised.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ascenta
Senior Member
Avatar
483 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 188
Joined Sep 2005
Post edited over 1 year ago by Ascenta.
     
Jul 20, 2017 18:40 |  #78

John from PA wrote in post #18407063 (external link)
The determination of battery capacity is not an easy task, and cannot be accomplished in the manner in which you are testing.

How do you know how I'm testing? Well, sorry I guess I didn't say exactly in my previous posts. I use a hobby charger to discharge these to 2.8v which is the proper voltage for these cells. Some can be 2.5v, or even 2.0v. I've been over this stuff, trust me. I've been dealing with Li-Ion extensively for nearly 10 years.

Other cells I've tested are so close to spec you'd be amazed. I never expect them to be so close, but often they are within 20mAh on my analyzer. That's great. But being 40-50% lower, not so much.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ from ­ PA
Cream of the Crop
8,005 posts
Likes: 488
Joined May 2003
Location: Southeast Pennsylvania
     
Jul 20, 2017 18:54 |  #79

Ascenta wrote in post #18407139 (external link)
How do you know how I'm testing?

Ascenta wrote in post #18404764 (external link)
But after last night I'm not so sure. I've used/charged it a few times now, and last night it was at 50% so I decided to top it off. When it was fully charged, my charger said it put about 500mAh into it. So that would mean the battery's capacity is around 1000mAh. NOT 2600mAh. That's a huge difference!

I understand the best way to determine capacity is to do a discharge from 100%, but my charger does not do that. But since Li-Ion chargers don't typically overcharge, I think this is enough proof for me. Even if it wasn't exactly at 50% and the charger stopped short, 1000mAh vs 2600mAh isn't even close. I'll be generous and call this a 1200mAh cell...well under Canon's 1865mAh.

I may not know the exact details of how you are testing, but it is readily apparent to me, at least reading the bold underlined text immediately above, that you are establishing capacity by a charge cycle, not the discharge cycle used by a battery manufacturer.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ascenta
Senior Member
Avatar
483 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 188
Joined Sep 2005
Post edited over 1 year ago by Ascenta.
     
Jul 20, 2017 18:59 |  #80

John from PA wrote in post #18407154 (external link)
I may not know the exact details of how you are testing, but it is readily apparent to me, at least reading the bold underlined text immediately above, that you are establishing capacity by a charge cycle, not the discharge cycle used by a battery manufacturer.

Yes, before destroying the thing I certainly wanted to charge it the normal way. After doing this and seeing an obvious shortage, I opened the pack and tested the cells individually with a discharge from 100%. That's what I was talking about yesterday and did this last night.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chuckmiller
Senior Member
663 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 165
Joined May 2012
Location: Tampa and Daytona Beach, Florida USA
     
Jul 20, 2017 19:36 |  #81

This may be the best and the worst technical battery thread I have ever read. :-)


.
.
.
Retiring from Fire/Rescue after 37 years on 6/30/2020 and counting the days

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ascenta
Senior Member
Avatar
483 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 188
Joined Sep 2005
Post edited over 1 year ago by Ascenta.
     
Jul 20, 2017 20:19 |  #82

chuckmiller wrote in post #18407187 (external link)
This may be the best and the worst technical battery thread I have ever read. :-)

Haha sure went downhill fast. Since it defies basic logic, let's just throw salt in the wound by saying this battery is actually great. Hell, it's amazing! Best battery ever!! A+++ will buy again! Just placed an order for another.

Thanks everyone for helping me see the light. I guess my extensive knowledge of Li-Ion cells and daily use is just for fun. I'm faking it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cristphoto
Senior Member
870 posts
Likes: 35
Joined Feb 2010
Location: Maryland
     
Jan 13, 2018 17:21 |  #83

I just got a new 5D4 a couple months ago. Also have the 5D3. I have used Watson generic batteries from B&H in the 5D3 for years with no issue. The 5D4 gives a warning if I try to put the Watson in it (never got a warning with the 5D3). Also the new charger acts differently when using the Watson in it (same LC-E6 came with both cameras). When charging a Watson in the new charger I get three fast blinks on the charger instead of slower blinks like on the older charger. Plus after leaving the battery in for a while I don't get the green light on the new charger. I've heard the latest firmware in the 5D4 (mine has ver. 1.0.4) causes the warning in the camera to appear where earlier firmware didn't. ANYONE HERE ABLE TO CONFIRM THIS? Perhaps Canon modified the newest chargers to behave differently too (scare the user to stick with Canon battery?). Using the Watson in the 5D3 the operation is totally the same. The camera registers the battery and the usage stats work fine. Not so in the 5D4.


5D MKIV, 5D MKIII, 1D MKIV, 24L II, 35L, 50L, 85LIS, 100LIS Macro, 135L, 300LIS, 16-35L, 24-70L, 70-200LIS, 100-400LIS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnf3f
Goldmember
Avatar
3,876 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 568
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wales
Post edited 6 months ago by johnf3f.
     
Jan 14, 2018 15:53 |  #84

For what it's worth I have a Canon 7D2 which uses the same LP-E6N battery pack and have given up on both the Canon batteries and a two non-OEM brands that I have.
Luckily I use the battery Grip for handling and balance. So I dug out some old Sanyo Eneloops that had been lying idle for about 3 years. I decided to discharge them and then give them a slow charge them to see if they were still good. So, left idle for 3 years, they still gave 2135 Mah - not bad for 1900 Mah cells! I didn't bother testing them after a fresh charge as I was more than happy.

At best these Eneloops should equal one Canon LP-E6 pack, yet they exceed two Canon packs?!? Note this was in the summer - in the winter they are even better. Totally illogical but I go on results not specs - does anybody want some junk LP-E6/E6n packs as I won't be using them!

Like Ascenta I do a lot of testing/using of batteries (though normally in high discharge circumstances) and have found that specs mean next to nothing. Testing and hands on use are the only real guide.

Just my thoughts.


Life is for living, cameras are to capture it (one day I will learn how!).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

10,057 views & 12 likes for this thread
3rd Party batteries and 5D4
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is suitman1
640 guests, 357 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.