Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AA Battery Charger

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
May 8, 2005 8:37:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I recently bought a Canon Powershot A95, and I was wondering if anyone
had any recommendations on some good AA battery chargers. I've heard
from some places that the 15 minute Engergizer battery chargers don't
charge the batteries to their full capacities. Or atleast maybe give me
some idea of what to look for in a battery charger. Thanks.

More about : battery charger

Anonymous
May 8, 2005 8:37:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sun, 08 May 2005 16:37:22 GMT, in rec.photo.digital Jake
<EKAJL86007@aol.com> wrote:

>I recently bought a Canon Powershot A95, and I was wondering if anyone
>had any recommendations on some good AA battery chargers. I've heard
>from some places that the 15 minute Engergizer battery chargers don't
>charge the batteries to their full capacities. Or atleast maybe give me
>some idea of what to look for in a battery charger. Thanks.

Good charger and vendor.

http://thomas-distributing.com/mhc401fs.htm
----------
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 8:37:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Jake <EKAJL86007@aol.com> writes:
> I recently bought a Canon Powershot A95, and I was wondering if anyone
> had any recommendations on some good AA battery chargers. I've heard
> from some places that the 15 minute Engergizer battery chargers don't
> charge the batteries to their full capacities. Or atleast maybe give me
> some idea of what to look for in a battery charger. Thanks.

The 15 min Energizer charger charges to 85% or so in 15 minutes (a
little longer for high capacity batteries). Then the light turns
green and the fan turns off. If you're in a hurry, you can use the
batteries right away (and not get the absolute maximum capacity). If
you leave them in the charger, they keep trickle charging and reach
100% in a few hours. Any ultra-fast charger pretty much has to work
that way. NiMH charging efficiency drops a lot as the cell gets full,
and continuing to fast-charge past 85% would get the insides of the
cells excessively hot.

My favorite slower charger is the LaCrosse BC-900, available from
Thomas Distributing among other places. Maha stuff isn't bad, but IMO
it's overrated and I don't understand the fanatical following it has.
Related resources
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 8:37:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Jake wrote:

> I recently bought a Canon Powershot A95, and I was wondering if
anyone
> had any recommendations on some good AA battery chargers. I've heard
> from some places that the 15 minute Engergizer battery chargers don't
> charge the batteries to their full capacities. Or atleast maybe give
me
> some idea of what to look for in a battery charger. Thanks.

See http://nordicgroup.us/chargers

This will tell you everything that you need to know.
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 8:37:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <1115581763.950275.231200@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
scharf.steven@gmail.com wrote:

> Jake wrote:
>
> > I recently bought a Canon Powershot A95, and I was wondering if
> anyone
> > had any recommendations on some good AA battery chargers. I've heard
> > from some places that the 15 minute Engergizer battery chargers don't
> > charge the batteries to their full capacities. Or atleast maybe give
> me
> > some idea of what to look for in a battery charger. Thanks.
>
> See http://nordicgroup.us/chargers
>
> This will tell you everything that you need to know.

Assuming that the reviewer's budget limits are the same as yours.
Possibly the reviewer's criteria as well.

--
To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.
May 8, 2005 8:52:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <6frfe.66021$c24.39799@attbi_s72>, Jake <EKAJL86007@aol.com> wrote:

>I recently bought a Canon Powershot A95, and I was wondering if anyone
>had any recommendations on some good AA battery chargers.


Two words for you:

Maha. Powerex.

The only serious choice, in my opinion.
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 10:39:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

NiMH batteries price will keep dropping. There is no reason to baby sit cheap
batteries.

If you don't like 15 min charger, there are 30 min and 1 hour chargers in
walmart/target... with 90 days no questions ask return policy.

Check charger reviews in steve digicam web site(google it).

On Sun, 08 May 2005 16:37:22 GMT, Jake <EKAJL86007@aol.com> wrote:

=>I recently bought a Canon Powershot A95, and I was wondering if anyone
=>had any recommendations on some good AA battery chargers. I've heard
=>from some places that the 15 minute Engergizer battery chargers don't
=>charge the batteries to their full capacities. Or atleast maybe give me
=>some idea of what to look for in a battery charger. Thanks.
May 8, 2005 10:57:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Thanks for all the input everybody. I just have a couple more questions
though. I keep reading about people periodically "conditioning" their
batteries. Does the Energizer charger have anything like that, or does
that basically just mean fully draining the batteries and charging them
up full again? So the Energizer 15 minute charger should do a good job
with everything? I just didn't see anything about trickle charging on
the Energizer package so I stayed away.

Paul Rubin wrote:

> The 15 min Energizer charger charges to 85% or so in 15 minutes (a
> little longer for high capacity batteries). Then the light turns
> green and the fan turns off. If you're in a hurry, you can use the
> batteries right away (and not get the absolute maximum capacity). If
> you leave them in the charger, they keep trickle charging and reach
> 100% in a few hours. Any ultra-fast charger pretty much has to work
> that way. NiMH charging efficiency drops a lot as the cell gets full,
> and continuing to fast-charge past 85% would get the insides of the
> cells excessively hot.
>
> My favorite slower charger is the LaCrosse BC-900, available from
> Thomas Distributing among other places. Maha stuff isn't bad, but IMO
> it's overrated and I don't understand the fanatical following it has.
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 10:57:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Jake <EKAJL86007@aol.com> writes:
> Thanks for all the input everybody. I just have a couple more questions
> though. I keep reading about people periodically "conditioning" their
> batteries. Does the Energizer charger have anything like that, or does
> that basically just mean fully draining the batteries and charging them
> up full again? So the Energizer 15 minute charger should do a good job
> with everything? I just didn't see anything about trickle charging on
> the Energizer package so I stayed away.

Yes, conditioning just means fully draining the batteries and charging
them back up. The Energizer charger does not have a conditioning
feature but it's easy enough to do by just using the batteries in your
camera til they need a charge. If the batteries haven't been used in
a very very long time, or if they are brand new, they will tend to
have much less capacity than if they've been conditioned through
several discharge/charge cycles. The LaCrosse BC-900 has a feature to
do that (it measures the capacity at each cycle, and keeps cycling til
the capacity stops increasing). Some other chargers like the Maha
C-204 have a button to do one charge/discharge cycle, but don't have
any measurement capability.

If I had to pick just one charger it would be the LaCrosse. The
Energizer is a very good deal though (I've seen it as low as $25), and
the cells that come with it are of high quality. And there are times
when an ultra fast charge is very handy.
May 8, 2005 11:03:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <ditfe.67009$WI3.18820@attbi_s71>, Jake <EKAJL86007@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>Thanks for all the input everybody. I just have a couple more questions
>though. I keep reading about people periodically "conditioning" their
>batteries.

Maha. Powerex. This is the only AA NiMh charger that's worth a damn.
I have 2 of them, an older AA charger, and one for doing 9v. I consider
these, and the Powerex batteries, to be among my most important tools.

http://www.mahaenergy.com/store/item.asp?idproduct=352
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 11:03:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) writes:
> Maha. Powerex. This is the only AA NiMh charger that's worth a damn.

Oh nonsense, I'm not saying Maha stuff is terrible, but I just don't
understand this fanaticism some people have for it. There is better
stuff around.
May 9, 2005 12:06:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <7xmzr5h6pd.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>,
Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt; wrote:
>
>
>fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) writes:
>> Maha. Powerex. This is the only AA NiMh charger that's worth a damn.
>
>Oh nonsense, I'm not saying Maha stuff is terrible, but I just don't
>understand this fanaticism some people have for it. There is better
>stuff around.

Do tell. If you're right I'll probably buy it. The Maha charger and
Powerex batteries work for me, better than any of the others I tried
before I discovered it.

So if you say "nonsense", please give an example of a AA charger that
works better than Maha.
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 12:06:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <xjufe.11930$fI.339@fed1read05>,
fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) wrote:

> So if you say "nonsense", please give an example of a AA charger that
> works better than Maha.

Ansmann

--
To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.
May 9, 2005 12:17:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <bob_salomon-730601.16093908052005@news.isp.giganews.com>,
Bob Salomon <bob_salomon@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>In article <xjufe.11930$fI.339@fed1read05>,
> fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) wrote:
>
>> So if you say "nonsense", please give an example of a AA charger that
>> works better than Maha.
>
>Ansmann

You're saying it's "as good", or "works better?" Maybe just a little
faster? (Not necessarily a good thing, but ok). Is it a lot cheaper or
something?
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 12:17:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <itufe.11976$fI.3518@fed1read05>,
fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) wrote:

> In article <bob_salomon-730601.16093908052005@news.isp.giganews.com>,
> Bob Salomon <bob_salomon@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >In article <xjufe.11930$fI.339@fed1read05>,
> > fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) wrote:
> >
> >> So if you say "nonsense", please give an example of a AA charger that
> >> works better than Maha.
> >
> >Ansmann
>
> You're saying it's "as good", or "works better?" Maybe just a little
> faster? (Not necessarily a good thing, but ok). Is it a lot cheaper or
> something?

No it is probably more. And is better. One model is a 10 minute version
with any battery, others work on any current and come with all plugs,
others take as many as 12 AA and automatically test and refresh all
types of NiCd and NiMh AAA, AA, C, D, N and 9V and work on any current
in any part of the world. Of course all are smart chargers.

--
To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.
May 9, 2005 12:36:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <bob_salomon-E44697.16344008052005@news.isp.giganews.com>,
Bob Salomon <bob_salomon@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>In article <itufe.11976$fI.3518@fed1read05>,
> fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) wrote:
>
>> In article <bob_salomon-730601.16093908052005@news.isp.giganews.com>,
>> Bob Salomon <bob_salomon@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >In article <xjufe.11930$fI.339@fed1read05>,
>> > fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) wrote:
>> >
>> >> So if you say "nonsense", please give an example of a AA charger that
>> >> works better than Maha.
>> >
>> >Ansmann
>>
>> You're saying it's "as good", or "works better?" Maybe just a little
>> faster? (Not necessarily a good thing, but ok). Is it a lot cheaper or
>> something?
>
>No it is probably more. And is better. One model is a 10 minute version
>with any battery, others work on any current and come with all plugs,
>others take as many as 12 AA and automatically test and refresh all
>types of NiCd and NiMh AAA, AA, C, D, N and 9V and work on any current
>in any part of the world. Of course all are smart chargers.

Well, then I may have two chargers to put in the "only serious choice"
category.

But I have been blissfully happy with Maha, and I am a heavy battery user,
not just in cameras.
May 9, 2005 2:34:46 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) wrote in
news:BLufe.12009$fI.8355@fed1read05:

> Well, then I may have two chargers to put in the "only serious choice"
> category.

There are many serious choices from many different manufacturers.

> But I have been blissfully happy with Maha, and I am a heavy battery
> user, not just in cameras.

Your happiness is probably due to the Maha charger doing its job very
competently. I can't understand how you could conclude from that fact that
it is the only serious choice. Unless you have tried every charger
available and concluded that none but the Maha chargers work well enough
for serious users, then you have no basis whatsoever for your conclusion.

I have an Ansmann energy 8, nothing wrong with it for serious users,
especially if you need to charge C or D cells.

I also have a La Crosse BC-900, very much more serious than Maha, way more
features. I can't see how you could dismiss this for serious users.

I also have a GP PowerBank Smart, probably not considered an equal to Maha
- but can charge batteries in 1 - 1.5 hours (depending on capacity) and it
monitors each channel separately (allowing charging of 1, 2, 3 or 4 cells).

Personally I would not recommend the Maha chargers that only charge
batteries in pairs, I don't trust chargers that are happy to conclude: "on
average those two cells are charged".

According to the website mentioned in another post
(http://nordicgroup.us/chargers/) the chargers worth considering could be
made by: Accupower, GP, iPower, Lenmar, Maha, Ray-O-Vac, Vanson. Ansmann
chargers were dearer than the price target on that website, so probably
considered too serious.

My conclusion: The assertion that Maha is the only serious choice is not
supported by the facts - there are many serious choices!


--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 3-May-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"
May 9, 2005 3:28:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <auwfe.234357$GG5.234207@fe01!news.easynews.com>,
MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> wrote:
>
>
>fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) wrote in
>news:BLufe.12009$fI.8355@fed1read05:
>
>> Well, then I may have two chargers to put in the "only serious choice"
>> category.
>
>There are many serious choices from many different manufacturers.
>
>> But I have been blissfully happy with Maha, and I am a heavy battery
>> user, not just in cameras.
>
>Your happiness is probably due to the Maha charger doing its job very
>competently. I can't understand how you could conclude from that fact that
>it is the only serious choice. Unless you have tried every charger
>available and concluded that none but the Maha chargers work well enough
>for serious users, then you have no basis whatsoever for your conclusion.

I tried quite a few different units found in retail stores and was
consistently disappointed. At some point, I asked online what the deal
was, someone pointed me to Maha, and that was the end for me. I feel
very comfortable recommending them.
>
May 9, 2005 3:30:11 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <7xvf5tidvu.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>,
Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt; wrote:
>
>
>fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) writes:
>> Do tell. If you're right I'll probably buy it. The Maha charger and
>> Powerex batteries work for me, better than any of the others I tried
>> before I discovered it.
>
>That's heck of a lot different than saying no other charger (including
>those being made today) is worth a damn.

People on the thread were considering *Energizer*, which is a drugstore
product, and not worth a damn.
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 3:30:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) writes:
> People on the thread were considering *Energizer*, which is a drugstore
> product, and not worth a damn.

There are a lot of different Energizer chargers and some of them are
excellent. Their 15 minute charger in particular is a good charger
and Maha doesn't make anything like it. The cells that come with it
are also at least as good as Maha cells. Some other Energizer
chargers aren't so good, but you can say the same for Maha.
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 3:30:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sun, 08 May 2005 23:30:11 GMT, james wrote:

> People on the thread were considering *Energizer*, which is a
> drugstore product, and not worth a damn.

They do sell lower quality products, but they make several models,
such as their 15 and 30 minute chargers that are quite good, easily
better than some of Maha's models. Your opinions seem little better
than your opinion of *Energizer* chargers ("not worth a damn").
Again you've made rash statements based on incomplete information.
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 3:30:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

james wrote:
> In article <7xvf5tidvu.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>,
> Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt; wrote:
>
>>
>>fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) writes:
>>
>>>Do tell. If you're right I'll probably buy it. The Maha charger and
>>>Powerex batteries work for me, better than any of the others I tried
>>>before I discovered it.
>>
>>That's heck of a lot different than saying no other charger (including
>>those being made today) is worth a damn.
>
>
> People on the thread were considering *Energizer*, which is a drugstore
> product, and not worth a damn.
>
You mean that if something is sold in a place you disdain, it is no
good? Try reading some of the tests and see what you discover.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
May 9, 2005 3:53:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) wrote in
news:_gxfe.12029$fI.2801@fed1read05:

> I tried quite a few different units found in retail stores and was
> consistently disappointed. At some point, I asked online what the
> deal was, someone pointed me to Maha, and that was the end for me. I
> feel very comfortable recommending them.

Recommending a good brand is a little different to suggesting everything
other than what you recommend is no good.

Your reply totally ignores my point that there are other good chargers.
Just because you have tried some rubbish chargers that were not made by
Maha does not make all chargers not made by Maha rubbish.

BTW
Maha make the 401 charger which seems to be a good charger, but they also
make the 204 chargers which are not really up to scratch. They claim
state-of-the-art, but the 204 chargers don't bother checking the voltage on
each cell separately. The 204 chargers cannot charge 1 or 3 cells and they
cannot charge 2 different cells, they can only charge a matching pair or 2
pairs (therefore also a set of 4). Therefore I would not recommend the 204
as a serious charger, the 401 is the one I would recommend from Maha.



--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 3-May-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 3:53:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> writes:
> Maha make the 401 charger which seems to be a good charger...,, the
> 401 is the one I would recommend from Maha.

The 401 works pretty well in slow charge mode. In fast charge mode is
gets the cells uncomfortably hot, and it doesn't charge all the cells
by the same amount! I suspect it stops charging when it decides that
one of the cells is completely charged, i.e. the channels aren't
really independent.
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 3:53:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Paul Rubin wrote:
> MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> writes:
>
>>Maha make the 401 charger which seems to be a good charger...,, the
>>401 is the one I would recommend from Maha.
>
>
> The 401 works pretty well in slow charge mode. In fast charge mode is
> gets the cells uncomfortably hot, and it doesn't charge all the cells
> by the same amount! I suspect it stops charging when it decides that
> one of the cells is completely charged, i.e. the channels aren't
> really independent.
Not true. The channels ARE independent.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 4:39:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> writes:

>Personally I would not recommend the Maha chargers that only charge
>batteries in pairs, I don't trust chargers that are happy to conclude: "on
>average those two cells are charged".

Any charger that charges cells in pairs concludes "on the assumption
that those two cells were discharged together, and thus had the same
amount of charge removed, they are now charged". If you put in two
cells that were *not* discharged as a pair, you won't get proper charge
termination, but that's really your fault not the charger's.

I've used chargers that charge in pairs (or 4 in series, or 6 in series)
for years, and as long as you load them with sets of cells that were
discharged together they're fine.

The nice thing about chargers that monitor cells individually is that
you don't have to care about this anymore. It's convenient. But it
isn't absolutely essential if your camera actually uses 2 or 4 cells.

Dave
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 4:51:47 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Jake wrote:
> I recently bovght a Canon Powershot A95, and I was wondering if anyone
> had any recommendations on some good AA battery chargers. I've heard
> from some places that the 15 minvte Engergizer battery chargers don't
> charge the batteries to their fvll capacities. Or atleast maybe give me
> some idea of what to look for in a battery charger. Thanks.

Others have recommended premivm-qvality batteries and chargers, and I
won't dispvte their choices. Bvt for my Powershot A20 (ancestor of yovr
A95) I jvst vse one of the inexpensive chargers available in most mass
merchandise store, and carry a spare fvlly-charged set of AAs jvst in
case the first set dies before I'm done shooting. This works well
enovgh for me, bvt bear in mind that I generally don't vse the camera
more than once or twice a week for snapshots. (I don't vse any
battery-operated accessories, vnless yov covnt my laptop compvter ...
and it doesn't take AA cells.)

If yov vse the camera a lot or yov have several other devices that vse
rechargeable AAs, bvy one of the premivm chargers and vse high-qvality,
high-capacity cells. Otherwise, yov can get by fairly well with a
Rayovac, Energizer or Dvracell charger and NiMH cells from yovr favorite
mass-merchandise store. Either way, I recommend yov bvy at least one
spare set of batteries, and mark the cells so yov always vse the same
two (or fovr) cells together as a set. Yov won't get the same
charge-capacity or battery life with the cheaper stvff, bvt they'll work
well enovgh for weekend snapshooting -- and when the time comes,
replacements will probably cost less and last longer than what's
available today.

Whatever batteries and charger yov decide on, remember that NiMH
batteries lose some of their charge even when they're jvst sitting idle.
For best resvlts, fvlly charge the batteries the day before yov plan
on vsing the camera -- and charge vp a spare set if yov're going to a
family revnion or day trip where yov expect to take a lot of shots. (I
always plan on vsing flash for every shot, and flash adds to the battery
drain.) Going on vacation, yov'll want to pack the charger (three-hovr
charge or faster); and I recommend also keeping a covple sets of
ordinary alkaline AAs handy for emergency sitvations.

--
Walter Lvffman Medina, TN USA
Amatevr cvrmvdgeon, eqval opportvnity annoyer
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 5:21:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"james" <fishbowl@conservatory.com> wrote in message
news:BLufe.12009$fI.8355@fed1read05...

> Well, then I may have two chargers to put in the "only serious choice"
> category.
>
> But I have been blissfully happy with Maha, and I am a heavy battery user,
> not just in cameras.

The poster promoting Ansmann is their U.S. distributor.

Be very cautious about buying chargers that can only charge at a single,
very high rate. The very fast Ansmann charger doesn't come with a 12 volt
car adapter because it can get too hot too safely use in a car. There are
also moral issues with buying products distributed by HP Marketing, the
Ansmann distributor.

At this time, the Maha MH-C401FS is the best choice for an AA charger that
a) chargers each battery individually, and b) is usable on both 12VDC, as
well as 110/220VAC.

Steve
http://nordicgroup.us/chargers/
May 9, 2005 5:38:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

What about the 204W?

> At this time, the Maha MH-C401FS is the best choice for an AA charger that
> a) chargers each battery individually, and b) is usable on both 12VDC, as
> well as 110/220VAC.
>
> Steve
> http://nordicgroup.us/chargers/
>
>
May 9, 2005 6:03:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <tWyfe.5699$pe3.3764@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
Steven M. Scharf <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:

>also moral issues with buying products distributed by HP Marketing, the
>Ansmann distributor.

HP? As in Hewlett Packard? Did they diversify into whaling or diamond
mining while I wasn't being a hippie for a moment?
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 8:35:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Well Jake, as you can see you stepped into something of a hornet's
nest. There's almost nothing in the world of digital photography that
stirs up as much heat as batteries and chargers.

I've gone through virtually every generation of NiMH charger and
battery and for the past two or three years have been extremely happy
with a combination of Rayovac one hour charger at home, and for my
considerable travel, a very small Panasonic. Both have independent
channels for charging and both seem to do a good job with whatever I
throw at them, whether AAA's, AA's, or, in the case of the Rayovac, 9
volts.

It may be that there are other 'best' chargers, but these are
reasonably priced, readily available (easily returned if faulty) and,
frankly, if you have good properly conditioned batteries you'll get
great results. If you're more on the geeky side, then read all the
reviews, get out your credit card and hit the web.
I'd rather spend the time taking pictures.
May 9, 2005 9:41:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

davem@cs.ubc.ca (Dave Martindale) wrote in
news:D 5mbgb$fdq$2@mughi.cs.ubc.ca:

> MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> writes:
>
>>Personally I would not recommend the Maha chargers that only charge
>>batteries in pairs, I don't trust chargers that are happy to conclude:
>>"on average those two cells are charged".
>
> Any charger that charges cells in pairs concludes "on the assumption
> that those two cells were discharged together, and thus had the same
> amount of charge removed, they are now charged". If you put in two
> cells that were *not* discharged as a pair, you won't get proper
> charge termination, but that's really your fault not the charger's.
>
> I've used chargers that charge in pairs (or 4 in series, or 6 in
> series) for years, and as long as you load them with sets of cells
> that were discharged together they're fine.
>
> The nice thing about chargers that monitor cells individually is that
> you don't have to care about this anymore. It's convenient. But it
> isn't absolutely essential if your camera actually uses 2 or 4 cells.

Sure, as long as you have no devices that use 1 or 3 or 5 AA cells then as
a rule the low-tech chargers should work. Unless you have a bad cell.

As long as you use cells in good condition with near enough to the same
charge capacity (there is always some variation) and they are used in a
device where they are connected in serial as a pair or a set of 4, then you
should be fine with a Maha 204 charger.

If you use a device which takes an odd number of AA cells, or if you are
using older cells that may not be performing as well as they used to (a set
that was once the same capacity may now have a big variation) then a
charger with 4 independent channels will happily charge them to full and
you don't need to worry.

Seriously, how much do you save by buying a charger that only monitors your
AA cells in pairs? Is it a good sign that the charger is made with cost
cutting being the major design criterion? Sure 90% of devices that use AA
cells use 2 or 4, but why not design the charger to also work with the
other 10%.


--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 3-May-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 9:41:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

MarkH wrote:
> davem@cs.ubc.ca (Dave Martindale) wrote in
> news:D 5mbgb$fdq$2@mughi.cs.ubc.ca:
>
>
>>MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> writes:
>>
>>
>>>Personally I would not recommend the Maha chargers that only charge
>>>batteries in pairs, I don't trust chargers that are happy to conclude:
>>>"on average those two cells are charged".
>>
>>Any charger that charges cells in pairs concludes "on the assumption
>>that those two cells were discharged together, and thus had the same
>>amount of charge removed, they are now charged". If you put in two
>>cells that were *not* discharged as a pair, you won't get proper
>>charge termination, but that's really your fault not the charger's.
>>
>>I've used chargers that charge in pairs (or 4 in series, or 6 in
>>series) for years, and as long as you load them with sets of cells
>>that were discharged together they're fine.
>>
>>The nice thing about chargers that monitor cells individually is that
>>you don't have to care about this anymore. It's convenient. But it
>>isn't absolutely essential if your camera actually uses 2 or 4 cells.
>
>
> Sure, as long as you have no devices that use 1 or 3 or 5 AA cells then as
> a rule the low-tech chargers should work. Unless you have a bad cell.
>
> As long as you use cells in good condition with near enough to the same
> charge capacity (there is always some variation) and they are used in a
> device where they are connected in serial as a pair or a set of 4, then you
> should be fine with a Maha 204 charger.
>
> If you use a device which takes an odd number of AA cells, or if you are
> using older cells that may not be performing as well as they used to (a set
> that was once the same capacity may now have a big variation) then a
> charger with 4 independent channels will happily charge them to full and
> you don't need to worry.
>
> Seriously, how much do you save by buying a charger that only monitors your
> AA cells in pairs? Is it a good sign that the charger is made with cost
> cutting being the major design criterion? Sure 90% of devices that use AA
> cells use 2 or 4, but why not design the charger to also work with the
> other 10%.
>
>
I used a Maha 204 charger for two years, and it did a good job of
charging my batteries. I did feel that sometimes the batteries ended up
unevenly charged, and about a year ago bought the Maha 401. It charges
each battery individually. I like this method much better, but when I
bought the 204, individual chargers were quite a lot more expensive.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
May 9, 2005 11:07:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <wRCfe.241685$GG5.103020@fe01!news.easynews.com>,
MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> wrote:
>
>
>fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) wrote in news:twzfe.12063$fI.2649
>@fed1read05:
>
>In future if you don't mean what you say then maybe you could refrain from
>saying it, some of us can't tell how serious someone is from a Usenet post.

You won't tell me what to say or how to say it. Likewise, I won't argue
with you. I strongly encourage Powerex batteries and Maha chargers.
If you have a problem with the *way* I strongly encourage them, that's
yours.

But I already backed off this topic, and the difference between me and
you is, you're still thinking about it. You even seem to be upset.
Well, stop it.
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 11:07:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Mon, 09 May 2005 07:07:18 GMT, james wrote:

>>In future if you don't mean what you say then maybe you could refrain from
>>saying it, some of us can't tell how serious someone is from a Usenet post.
>
> You won't tell me what to say or how to say it. Likewise, I won't argue
> with you. I strongly encourage Powerex batteries and Maha chargers.
> If you have a problem with the *way* I strongly encourage them, that's
> yours.

You're mistaken. Nobody has had a problem with you encouraging
the use of Powerex batteries and Maha chargers. The problem is with
your stating that it's the only brand "worth a damn" and that
Enegizer products aren't "worth a damn", when some clearly are
excellent.


> But I already backed off this topic, and the difference between me and
> you is, you're still thinking about it. You even seem to be upset.
> Well, stop it.

You may believe that, but it looks to me like you're the one
that's upset, and I strongly suspect that mine is not the minority
view. Are you willing to admit that Maha is not the only company
that makes chargers that are worth a damn?

I don't expect you to be familiar with the better Energizer
chargers, but they're widely available, maybe even in drugstores. I
think that I bought mine in a Duane Reed, which is similar to
Rite-Aid, CVS, Eckerd, Walgreens and similar stores. You only have
to look at a photo or drawing of it to recognize that careful
thought and good engineering went into its design and construction,
unlike the cheaper models you've no doubt seen in the drugstores.
I've seen the better Rayovac chargers in K-Mart and CompUSA, and
they've no doubt been sold in many other stores.
May 9, 2005 4:39:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) wrote in
news:G_Dfe.12102$fI.2527@fed1read05:

> In article <wRCfe.241685$GG5.103020@fe01!news.easynews.com>,
> MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> wrote:
>>
>>
>>fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) wrote in news:twzfe.12063$fI.2649
>>@fed1read05:
>>
>>In future if you don't mean what you say then maybe you could refrain
>>from saying it, some of us can't tell how serious someone is from a
>>Usenet post.
>
> You won't tell me what to say or how to say it. Likewise, I won't
> argue with you. I strongly encourage Powerex batteries and Maha
> chargers.

That is more like it, much fairer language, thank you.

> But I already backed off this topic, and the difference between me and
> you is, you're still thinking about it. You even seem to be upset.
> Well, stop it.

Haha, good one! You seem to be saying that you are no longer thinking
about it, ironically you say this while posting about it, that's pretty
funny.

You think I am upset? Maybe you are projecting your own emotions onto me?
I don't see how someone rubbishing all chargers in the world except one
brand, would upset me - all it does is make me wonder what sort of person
feels such a need to put down everything they don't own, with no valid
reason.


--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 3-May-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 4:53:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 9 May 2005 04:35:07 -0700, RK wrote:

> I've gone through virtually every generation of NiMH charger and
> battery and for the past two or three years have been extremely happy
> with a combination of Rayovac one hour charger at home, and for my
> considerable travel, a very small Panasonic. Both have independent
> channels for charging and both seem to do a good job with whatever I
> throw at them, whether AAA's, AA's, or, in the case of the Rayovac, 9
> volts.

That was my experience too. Even an inexpensive charger without
independent channels will do an adequate job for most people, but I
have a number of devices that use either one or three AA cells. I
looked a long time before finding a couple of chargers that had
independent circuits, but the Rayovac was the first really well
designed example I found. The contacts hold the batteries very
firmly so contact is never lost. A couple of times when came back
to remove the batteries from a cheaper charger I found that one cell
had to undergo another charge cycle because it must have moved.
Only by a tiny amount, too small to see, but enough to cause the
charger to skip that cell. It also didn't pack the cells too
closely, and used a large external transformer, both useful for
keeping the batteries from overheating.
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 7:34:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"james" <fishbowl@conservatory.com> wrote in message
news:Sxzfe.12064$fI.5201@fed1read05...

> HP? As in Hewlett Packard? Did they diversify into whaling or diamond
> mining while I wasn't being a hippie for a moment?

Not the marketing arm of HP! HP Marketing is a distributor of photographic
products. They complain to eBay if a product that they import is put up for
sale. I.e. HP Marketing is the exclusive importer of Heliopan hoods. Someone
was selling a used lens with a used Heliopan hood on eBay, and eBay removed
the listing at the request of HP Marketing. Can't really blame eBay as they
don't have the resources to investigate these issues, they just yank the
auction. Any company so petty as to complain to eBay about a used hood on a
used lens, being sold, certainly can do without our business.
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 9:07:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Jake" <EKAJL86007@aol.com> wrote in message
news:6frfe.66021$c24.39799@attbi_s72...
>I recently bought a Canon Powershot A95, and I was wondering if anyone
> had any recommendations on some good AA battery chargers. I've heard
> from some places that the 15 minute Engergizer battery chargers don't
> charge the batteries to their full capacities. Or atleast maybe give me
> some idea of what to look for in a battery charger. Thanks.

Go to Walmart or whatever and get the four Duracell bats and charger for
about $12.00. 2300mAh!
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 9:07:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Mon, 09 May 2005 17:07:24 GMT, Dave R knows who wrote:

>> I recently bought a Canon Powershot A95, and I was wondering if anyone
>> had any recommendations on some good AA battery chargers. I've heard
>> from some places that the 15 minute Engergizer battery chargers don't
>> charge the batteries to their full capacities. Or atleast maybe give me
>> some idea of what to look for in a battery charger. Thanks.
>
> Go to Walmart or whatever and get the four Duracell bats and charger for
> about $12.00. 2300mAh!

Those are very good batteries, but the charger is only fair. If
used mainly with the A95 it would probably do a decent enough job.
But it would be a good idea to have a second set of 4 AA NiMH
batteries. If that's the actual Walmart price then it wouldn't be a
bad idea to buy another set to get a spare charger if the first one
ever dies (or appears to, even if it hasn't). In the stores around
here the 4 Duracell AAs alone sell for between $11 and $12 and the
price more than doubles if you get the package that also includes
the charger.
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 9:07:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Dave R knows who" <kilbyfan@spamnotAOL.com> writes:
> Go to Walmart or whatever and get the four Duracell bats and charger for
> about $12.00. 2300mAh!

That's probably a timer controlled charger at that price, not a good idea.
Anonymous
May 10, 2005 2:25:01 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Bob Salomon" <bob_salomon@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:bob_salomon-730601.16093908052005@news.isp.giganews.com...
> In article <xjufe.11930$fI.339@fed1read05>,
> fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) wrote:
>
>> So if you say "nonsense", please give an example of a AA charger that
>> works better than Maha.
>
> Ansmann

exactly !!
Anonymous
May 10, 2005 3:21:38 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Mon, 09 May 2005 12:53:46 -0400, ASAAR <caught@22.com> wrote:

>On 9 May 2005 04:35:07 -0700, RK wrote:
>
>> I've gone through virtually every generation of NiMH charger and
>> battery and for the past two or three years have been extremely happy
>> with a combination of Rayovac one hour charger at home, and for my
>> considerable travel, a very small Panasonic. Both have independent
>> channels for charging and both seem to do a good job with whatever I
>> throw at them, whether AAA's, AA's, or, in the case of the Rayovac, 9
>> volts.
>
> That was my experience too. Even an inexpensive charger without
>independent channels will do an adequate job for most people, but I
>have a number of devices that use either one or three AA cells. I
>looked a long time before finding a couple of chargers that had
>independent circuits, but the Rayovac was the first really well
>designed example I found. The contacts hold the batteries very
>firmly so contact is never lost. A couple of times when came back
>to remove the batteries from a cheaper charger I found that one cell
>had to undergo another charge cycle because it must have moved.
>Only by a tiny amount, too small to see, but enough to cause the
>charger to skip that cell. It also didn't pack the cells too
>closely, and used a large external transformer, both useful for
>keeping the batteries from overheating.

I purchased the MH-C401FS from Thomas.

It offers a 5 hour charging time, which they say is excellent for
prolonging the life of NIMH batteries.

All batteries are charged independently.

I'm not sure it is a good idea to Quick Charge batteries and I
personally like the idea of a 5 hour charge!

http://www.thomas-distributing.com/mhc401fs.htm

btw I have had EXCELLENT service from Thomas!

--
Scott in Florida
Anonymous
May 10, 2005 3:21:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Mon, 09 May 2005 23:21:38 GMT, Scott in Florida wrote:

> I purchased the MH-C401FS from Thomas.
>
> It offers a 5 hour charging time, which they say is excellent for
> prolonging the life of NIMH batteries.
>
> All batteries are charged independently.
>
> I'm not sure it is a good idea to Quick Charge batteries and I
> personally like the idea of a 5 hour charge!
>
> http://www.thomas-distributing.com/mhc401fs.htm
>
> btw I have had EXCELLENT service from Thomas!

I'm sure that Thomas is a good company and the C401FS is a fine
charger. But I'd also prefer using the 5 hour charge mode. More
recent fast chargers probably do a much better job than the C401FS
in Quick Charge mode, but for its time it was OK I guess. If you're
in no rush, charging for 5 hours seems like a better idea than
chargers that take only 2 or 3. And any problems that might result
from Quick Charge mode could be eliminated if the batteries are
removed before then start to really heat up.
Anonymous
May 10, 2005 7:17:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> writes:

>Sure, as long as you have no devices that use 1 or 3 or 5 AA cells then as
>a rule the low-tech chargers should work. Unless you have a bad cell.

Now come on, a charger that has two fast-charge circuits is not "low
tech". Low tech should be reserved for the slow trickle chargers and
the timed chargers. The only thing that's "higher tech" about the
chargers you favour is that they have one monitoring circuit per cell
rather than per 2 cells.

Yes, devices that take 1 or 3 cells are a problem for multiples-of-2
chargers. I didn't have any such devices using NiMH cells until
recently, and the trickle chargers still work for charging mismatched
cells. It just wasn't much of a problem.

>Seriously, how much do you save by buying a charger that only monitors your
>AA cells in pairs? Is it a good sign that the charger is made with cost
>cutting being the major design criterion? Sure 90% of devices that use AA
>cells use 2 or 4, but why not design the charger to also work with the
>other 10%.

Until two years or so ago, there were no fast chargers readily
available here that monitor cells individually. The 1-hour Rayovac was
the first one that I saw (and I bought one). Now there is plenty of
choice, and any new charger I buy would have this. So we agree on what
to recommend to someone buying a new charger.

But there's nothing wrong with using a charger that charges in pairs,
if you use it to charge batteries that were discharged as a pair.
The only "problem" with these older chargers is that they are restricted
in what you can use them for, not in how they do their job when used
appropriately. I'm not throwing out my older 2-cell-set chargers.

And having one charger that monitors each cell individually is enough to
handle the oddball cases (sets of 1 or 3, suspect cells, etc).

Dave
May 10, 2005 5:07:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

davem@cs.ubc.ca (Dave Martindale) wrote in
news:D 5p93u$79j$1@mughi.cs.ubc.ca:

> MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> writes:
>
>>Seriously, how much do you save by buying a charger that only monitors
>>your AA cells in pairs? Is it a good sign that the charger is made
>>with cost cutting being the major design criterion? Sure 90% of
>>devices that use AA cells use 2 or 4, but why not design the charger
>>to also work with the other 10%.
>
> Until two years or so ago, there were no fast chargers readily
> available here that monitor cells individually. The 1-hour Rayovac
> was the first one that I saw (and I bought one). Now there is plenty
> of choice, and any new charger I buy would have this. So we agree on
> what to recommend to someone buying a new charger.
>
> But there's nothing wrong with using a charger that charges in pairs,
> if you use it to charge batteries that were discharged as a pair.
> The only "problem" with these older chargers is that they are
> restricted in what you can use them for, not in how they do their job
> when used appropriately. I'm not throwing out my older 2-cell-set
> chargers.

I am not advocating throwing away a working charger. I am not putting down
anyone having bought a charger a couple of years ago that is not as good as
some available today. I am merely suggesting the when buying a charger
today, you might as well go with current tech and get a charger that can
monitor each cell individually.

I clearly stated "buying a charger" as in present tense, not "bought a
charger" which would be past tense. I stand by my belief that buying a
charger today you save little by buying one that charges in pairs and it is
better to get a charger that can monitor each cell individually and charge
1, 2, 3 or 4 cells. My charger can even charge 4 different AAA and/or AA
cells at the same time.



--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 3-May-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"
Anonymous
May 10, 2005 7:47:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> writes:

>I clearly stated "buying a charger" as in present tense, not "bought a
>charger" which would be past tense. I stand by my belief that buying a
>charger today you save little by buying one that charges in pairs and it is
>better to get a charger that can monitor each cell individually and charge
>1, 2, 3 or 4 cells. My charger can even charge 4 different AAA and/or AA
>cells at the same time.

I don't disagree with any of that. But you also said you "don't trust"
2-cell chargers. You called them "low tech". In fact, they are just as
trustworthy when used properly as single-cell-monitoring chargers, and
use the same sort of charge monitoring circuits.

Monitoring single cells makes a charger more flexible, but not
necessarily higher quality.

In fact, I've owned several instances of a charger that monitors each
cell individually, and yet was junk - because it often failed to detect
full charge on NiMH cells (Rayovac PS-1).

Dave
Anonymous
May 13, 2005 11:06:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Paul Rubin" <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt; wrote in message
news:7xpsw0yzhc.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com...
> "Dave R knows who" <kilbyfan@spamnotAOL.com> writes:
>> Go to Walmart or whatever and get the four Duracell bats and charger for
>> about $12.00. 2300mAh!
>
> That's probably a timer controlled charger at that price, not a good idea.

You are right. It's not consistent. I have two of these chargers and I have
four sets of four batts and sometimes there's a set which didn't get a good
charge.
!