Battery Grip... when did you really need it?

battery life is extended by SO much. The feel is much better too, especially if you have big hands. It's a must on a rebel.

side question while talking about battery life. Is the battery indicator any better on the 40D then it was on my XTI? It would show full for 95% of the time, and then when i lost a bar, the battery would go dead a short time later, there was really no warning.

I don't rely on the 40D's battery meter too much. It seems to always be on full. I've been out shooting for long days and when I get home to charge it, it is down to 48% or 52%, yet the 40D's meter always read full.

40D's battery meter is bad imo. You have three notches: full, half, and could die any second. Nikon is much better in this aspect.

cdifoto wrote in post #6230003
I didn't buy one for the battery life. I bought it so my pinky has somewhere to go.

That was my thinking as well.
I've been debating whether to get a grip since i had a 350D three years ago (then 400D, 30D and now 40D). I gave in a couple of weeks ago and got a Canon one.
It stayed on my 40D for about 3 days and ive not used it since. Ill be keeping it but whiel i know i can get used to it i would need a bigger bag, to start using a strap and its more a two handed job to hold up now.

I do like it but for me it means too many other changes. I will use it for things like School plays etc but that would be mainly to make my 40D look bigger than the other parents camera's and to make me look like a pro.
Shallow i know

LOL at least you're honest Dave!

RobNYC wrote in post #6272487
LOL at least you're honest Dave!

Seriously though, i find it alters the feel of my 40D and while many people say for the better i find it more awkward to hold. saying that i will use it every once in a while and it does seem to help me get strighter shots.

I bought a BG-E1 for my 300D. For me the main advantage was the better fit for my hands. I eventually stopped using it with the 300D, and I have not purchased a grip for my 30D. The added weight "outweighed" the better fit in the long run. Also, I never felt like the second battery actually gave me twice the number of shots. The 300D seemed to give premature low battery warnings with the grip, and I generally do not take more than a single battery worth of shots in a day anyway, especially with the 30D. Because the 30D fits my hands better than the 300D, all of the above contributed to my decision not to buy a BG-E2 for the 30D. I will say other photographers gave me more approving looks when I showed up with the black 300D with the grip!

Eyies wrote in post #6271345
40D's battery meter is bad imo. You have three notches: full, half, and could die any second. Nikon is much better in this aspect.

Do a quick search of "nikon battery meter problems" Nikon isn't any better. It is a problem that is inherent in batteries in general. The in-camera meters usually go by voltage, which isn't a good indicator with today's rechargeable batteries.

dave_bass5 wrote in post #6271762
That was my thinking as well.
I've been debating whether to get a grip since i had a 350D three years ago (then 400D, 30D and now 40D). I gave in a couple of weeks ago and got a Canon one.
It stayed on my 40D for about 3 days and ive not used it since. Ill be keeping it but whiel i know i can get used to it i would need a bigger bag, to start using a strap and its more a two handed job to hold up now.

I do like it but for me it means too many other changes. I will use it for things like School plays etc but that would be mainly to make my 40D look bigger than the other parents camera's and to make me look like a pro.
Shallow i know

I bet you're not a minority when it comes to this particular justification to owning a grip. Why not tho, if you like the feel and look, go for it. I've stayed away from using a grip for the same exact reason, to eliminate the "look at me" factor. The grip looks to me like one of those giant performance spoilers some guys like to put on the back of their little economy sedan cars

Yeah... and I think the giant white lens is enough of a look at me factor already without the grip!

RobNYC wrote in post #6228982
I have been thinking about getting a battery grip for my 40D. But I was wondering if anyone could enlighten me with an example of a time that, say, if you didn't have it you would have run out of juice and missed shots etc. In other words, what are the advantages or reasons that might help me decide whether I need it.

I have had my 40D out for say 12-14 hours and took 1000 pictures... and at the end of the day, the lowest I have seen my battery is around 35%. So I am just wondering what the real utility is?

In the days of film cameras, the add-on grip provided motor drive for faster advancing the film and winding the shutter, film magazines permitted 250' and longer spools of film for longer uninterrupted shooting. Modern dSLRs have fast advance even without a BG, and they shoot hundreds of shots without a BG. It is not difficult to merely carry a battery or four in a pocket, and swap them at a brief lull in the shooting. It is not difficult but a convenience having the buttons on the BG for portrait orientation, as photographers did without added buttons for decades. It is not a difficulty but a convenience in having more grip area, as again decades of photographers managed quite well with much smaller SLRs!

So do you need one, NO. Is it nice to have one, yes, for some.

Thanks Wilt. I remember when I was a little kid I had a Canon AE-1 Program film SLR. I always wanted the grip/winder. But naturally, when you are around 13, you don't have your own funds so you aren't getting whatever you want!

I have and love the winders for my OM SLR and for my medium format film SLR. Add to the list of benefits the remote triggering of a camera (which again does not require use of a BG for a dSLR). When I got my first dSLR I initially had a lust for the BG, once again. Yet after analyzing the value of the BG for the dSLR, as I outlined in my message, I determined it was a waste of my money and merely excess bulk and weight to lug around; while once in a while I rethink the decision, my mind has not changed yet about the utility of the BG.

I have a 30D and a grip for it and a 40D and the wireless grip for that. I don't use the grip for the 30D at all and I only use the wireless grip on the 40D when I want to make use of the wireless function. If you shoot a lot of portrait orientation then the grip makes sense.

At any other time, adding the grip simply adds weight and bulk. I don't mind the weight especially, but the bulk is the killer. I mostly cart around both my cameras, each with a mounted lens, in my Slingshot 200. Without the grips I can fit both cameras easily and can have my 100-400 and 70-200 f/2.8 IS mounted and stored at the same time - good for a wildlife trip, or the 70-200 and 17-55 mounted and a 10-22 for good measure when I shoot weddings. My Nifty, macro tubes and teleconverter sit in the outside pocket and my 2 x 580EX fit in the top compartment.

If I was to fit even one grip it would severely cramp my ability to travel well kitted out and compactly at the same time. I would have to dump one body for a start, or break down my kit into individual components and probably lose a lens or two, or a flash, from the bag. I generally mix up portrait and landscape shooting quite a bit, so a grip would have me changing my hold on the camera from one shot to the next, and all in all it's really not worth the hassle. For me, the grips are not beneficial in my day to day photography.

As for battery life, I know you can run the grips with a single battery, but if you have both batteries fitted at the same time, what are you going to be charging while they are both being slowly run down equally. You may as well have one battery in the pipe and one on the charger, or in your pocket keeping warm.