Looking at the battery for my Fuji x100s: $35 for an 1800 mAhr battery. Two AA (Eneloop, or any equivalent) rechargeable batteries would cost a total of about $5, have more capacity, wouldn't make the camera any bigger, and would provide a lot more options while traveling. They'd run at 3V instead of 3.6V, but that's probably more of a coincidence than an impossible technical hurdle - there have been cameras that run on AAs in the past.
So what's the argument in favor of these proprietary batteries?
Edit:
Many answers and comments are casually saying that lithium batteries recycle the flash faster, and so on. Please substantiate your claims. Here are two references demonstrating that Nickel Metal Hydride (Eneloops, etc.) recycle the flash the fastest by far, the total opposite of what you are claiming:
http://www.scantips.com/lights/flashbasics1e.html
Edit 2:
Seems like form factor is the leading legitimate reason (though for cameras aren't tiny, I don't see how this is a big deal), but the two things mentioned the most are Profit and Lithium-Is-Just-Better. I think this question can only be answered with another question, which is, if those two things are true, Why do Flashes not use Proprietary Batteries?
Answer
I think the Profit reason is without merit - See Why do Flashes not use Proprietary Batteries?. We also have no scientific reference explaining why proprietary lithiums would outperform AA lithiums or AA NiMh in any way, but we do have anecdotal evidence that they provide for a snappier/more responsive camera.
Also, for small cameras especially, the form factor can be improved with proprietary batteries.
So mainly, it's because manufacturers place a greater weight of importance on form factor and perhaps on some sort of voltage control/performance factor that we suspect might be present but don't fully understand. While I'd prefer a slightly larger camera using cost-effective and ubiquitous AAs, manufacturers simply disagree with me for the most part.
No comments:
Post a Comment