Quote:
Originally Posted by GEli
Something's wrong with your battery, then. I'll regularly get 1200+ shots on a single charge on my K10D. Non-rechargeable AAs may get more shots (though 2500 is a lie or with a P+S and no LCD use), but will cost you an arm and a leg to use over any extended period, besides being rather un-green.
|
Not a lie at all. I routinely got around 2500 pictures with my K100D and CRV3 lithium cells. And that's with a lot of review on the LCD. It is a little un-green, but at least they can be recycled (which I did).
And, say you take the equivalent of a roll of film a day for a year. Six sets of batteries will get you through, for a total cost of about $75. Compared to $30 for two sets of high-quality low-discharge NiMH batteries and another $30 for a decent charger, it's not really a lot more — but a whole lot less hassle.
If you only shoot a couple of hundred pictures a month, the lithium primary cell approach is likely to be
cheaper for the entire life of the camera ($12 a year!) — and you're always assured a good charge when you take the camera off the shelf.
And to top it all off, the K100D definitely performs better (focus speed in particular) with lithiums.
Obviously the rechargeables are a better deal if you shoot more than that, and there is certainly the eco factor to consider.
(On the other question, btw, 300 would probably be right from the K10D if you use the flash with every shot.)