Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

IC3 rechargeable batteries

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
August 11, 2005 6:11:22 AM

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

Does anyone have any experience with the IC3 rechargeable AA batteries?
Radio Shack has them on sale and I'm considering them (but I think they are
made by Ray-O-Vac).

Is the only difference between the IC3 and regular NiMh batteries the charge
time?


My camera is a Canon S1 IS.

Thanks


--
Ray

Remove NO and SPAM to reply
Anonymous
August 11, 2005 6:11:23 AM

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

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 02:11:22 GMT, Ray wrote:

> Does anyone have any experience with the IC3 rechargeable AA batteries?
> Radio Shack has them on sale and I'm considering them (but I think they are
> made by Ray-O-Vac).
>
> Is the only difference between the IC3 and regular NiMh batteries the charge
> time?

That's a special design that probably should be avoided, as the
charger can only charge IC3 batteries quickly, and there's some
doubt that RayOVac will continue to produce them indefinitely. If
the charger is used with anything but the IC3 batteries, instead of
15 minutes, it will take *many* hours to finish charging. I don't
recall the exact number but think it's something in the 10 to 15
hour range. The IC3 batteries always had been the most expensive
NiMH batteries you could find, and when Radio Shack has sales of
other company's products, it often coincides with them dropping the
product from their catalog. See if the IC3's are still listed
online at www.radioshack.com. There should be nothing wrong with
IC3 batteries if you can continue locating them, and they should
charge nicely in any other NiMH charger. If you use them in a
RayOVac 60 minute charger or an Energizer 30 minute charger, they'd
charge in (respectively and approximately) a little over an hour,
and 30 minutes. It's the IC3 charger that appears to have not much
of a future.

FWIW, there are other companies that sell similarly fast chargers.
Energizer is one such, and they have 15 and 30 minute chargers.
These, like all other chargers I'm aware of, work with virtually all
NiMH batteries at the same speed, not just their own brand.


> My camera is a Canon S1 IS.

It should work nicely with 4 high capacity NiMH AA batteries from
any reputable manufacturer. As these are relatively inexpensive
commodity items there's no reason not to have 2 or 3 sets of
batteries. Then it really wouldn't matter if you have a slower
charger. When looking for a charger, speed is less important than
getting a good one that has an independent charging circuit for each
NiMH cell. This is usually indicated (if not stated on the package)
by the charger having not only a "power" LED, but an LED (or LCD
display) for each of the charging cells, or "batteries" (sic).
Anonymous
August 11, 2005 6:11:23 AM

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

I have used the Ray-O-Vac IC3 batteries for many months now. They are
amazing. They charge up in 15 minutes and last an incredibly long
time. And you can charge them up to 1000 times.

I also use NiMH batteries. THey charge overnight but last as long as
the IC3s. Both types of batteries are very good.

You will save hundreds and hundreds of dollars by using IC3 or NiMH
batteries rather than standard alkaline batteries, which seem to die
after about five pictures! :) 

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 02:11:22 GMT, "Ray" <rayjaymayNO@SPAMverizon.net>
wrote:

>
>Does anyone have any experience with the IC3 rechargeable AA batteries?
>Radio Shack has them on sale and I'm considering them (but I think they are
>made by Ray-O-Vac).
>
>Is the only difference between the IC3 and regular NiMh batteries the charge
>time?
>
>
>My camera is a Canon S1 IS.
>
>Thanks
Related resources
Anonymous
August 11, 2005 6:11:23 AM

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

ASAAR wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 23:15:03 -0500, at_nite wrote:
>
> > I also use NiMH batteries. THey charge overnight but last as long as
> > the IC3s. Both types of batteries are very good.
>
> That's because IC3 batteries are just NiMH batteries that are able
> to provide a small amount of data to the IC3 charger. They charge
> just like any other NiMH batteries of similar capacity when used in
> other non-IC3 chargers.
>
>
> > You will save hundreds and hundreds of dollars by using IC3 or NiMH
> > batteries rather than standard alkaline batteries, which seem to die
> > after about five pictures! :) 
>
> That's true for your camera. In mine, when flash is frequently
> used alkalines are good for about 200 shots. If flash isn't used,
> the alkalines last far longer, probably more than 800 shots per set.
>
> But I only use them for emergency battery backups, with NiMH being
> what I normally use in the camera. With the amount of shots I take,
> there's no way I'd save hundreds of dollars. For the NiMH batteries
> to break even in cost, they'd have to last more than 5 or 6 years.
> For other cameras (especially yours!) they might pay for themselves
> after only a day or two. :) 

What in the world are you shooting? I've used alkalines in three
different digital cameras. Best results came in my old Minolta Dimage
7i: 20 shots. Olympus E10 got about 12. My Pentax *istD got 9. All of
those were without flash. I never tried alkalines in my Olympus C2020.
Obviously, for me, NiMH makes better sense. I'm too lazy to figure the
cost of your 200 frames, but that would reduce price per shot
considerably. And, IME, NiMH AA cells last about three to four years,
max, so that does increase the cost per shot. My experience may not be
what everyone gets, but I've just discarded my three of my older NiMH
sets and am thinking of some kind of change before I replace them.
Alkaline won't do, but lithium non-rechargeable may, at somewhat higher
cost.
Anonymous
August 12, 2005 2:45:37 AM

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

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 23:15:03 -0500, at_nite wrote:

> I also use NiMH batteries. THey charge overnight but last as long as
> the IC3s. Both types of batteries are very good.

That's because IC3 batteries are just NiMH batteries that are able
to provide a small amount of data to the IC3 charger. They charge
just like any other NiMH batteries of similar capacity when used in
other non-IC3 chargers.


> You will save hundreds and hundreds of dollars by using IC3 or NiMH
> batteries rather than standard alkaline batteries, which seem to die
> after about five pictures! :) 

That's true for your camera. In mine, when flash is frequently
used alkalines are good for about 200 shots. If flash isn't used,
the alkalines last far longer, probably more than 800 shots per set.

But I only use them for emergency battery backups, with NiMH being
what I normally use in the camera. With the amount of shots I take,
there's no way I'd save hundreds of dollars. For the NiMH batteries
to break even in cost, they'd have to last more than 5 or 6 years.
For other cameras (especially yours!) they might pay for themselves
after only a day or two. :) 
Anonymous
August 12, 2005 4:34:23 AM

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

On 11 Aug 2005 00:52:21 -0700, Charlie Self wrote:

>> But I only use them for emergency battery backups, with NiMH being
>> what I normally use in the camera. With the amount of shots I take,
>> there's no way I'd save hundreds of dollars. For the NiMH batteries
>> to break even in cost, they'd have to last more than 5 or 6 years.
>> For other cameras (especially yours!) they might pay for themselves
>> after only a day or two. :) 
>
> What in the world are you shooting? I've used alkalines in three
> different digital cameras. Best results came in my old Minolta Dimage
> 7i: 20 shots. Olympus E10 got about 12. My Pentax *istD got 9. All of
> those were without flash. I never tried alkalines in my Olympus C2020.
> Obviously, for me, NiMH makes better sense.

The camera is a Fuji S5100 which uses 4 AAs. It's one of a number
of new cameras that are designed to operate very efficiently. I got
it last December shortly after it was introduced and figured it
would be a waste of time and batteries to use the included alkaline
AAs, so it wasn't until several months later that I tried testing
the original alkalines in it. The manual states a fairly rigourous
CIPA procedure to determine typical battery life, and they claim 200
shots for alkalines and 400 for NiMH (per charge). I tried to
duplicate the procedure and got a little more than 200 shots from
the alkalines before the batteries appeared to be exhausted. I then
completely stopped using the flash and thought I'd see how many more
pictures I could take, figuring it would be a dozen or less. Over
the next several days I managed to take more than 400 additional
shots! Fuji just announced its replacement, the S5200. This
increases the resolution from 4mp to 5mp, but the big news is that
it appears to be using a sensor similar to the Fuji F10 which should
make it one of the best non-DSLRs for taking pictures in low light.
!