David Lyga
Member
At least to me, this posting asks a very interesting question, the answer of which might confound my limited knowledge of electronics. This requires the help from someone with an in-depth knowledge of both electronics and digital technology.
I have a few, very small cheap digital cameras which suit my needs well. When I acquired these, I made certain that each took two AA batteries because I did not want to bother with chargers for such limited use. I knew before I had bought these, as most will know, that AA alkalines do not last too long in these cameras, maybe about 40 shots per set. (I accept that and know that rechargeable batteries are available.) When the batteries are 'deficient' a screen warning shows, stating that 'batteries are exhausted'. Out of curiosity, I have always tested these 'exhausted' AA batteries on a battery tester and compared the readings with those from new alkalines. Amazingly, the reading difference was very slight and I could not really understand why the camera no longer saw the 'used' batteries as being sufficiently powerful.
Being ever frugal, I got thinking. If two 'used' batteries were insufficient, why not use THREE 'used' alkalines to bring back the power to proper strength and not have to segregate such 'used' batteries when they are still very good? (I certainly had enough used batteries lying around, as I do not generally discard such but use them for other things such as radios and flashlights.)
I bought a cheap three AA cell battery holder which would provide a 4.5 volt 'in series' output into the camera (NIKON CoolPix 3200). I figured a way to attach the camera's battery terminals correctly and securely, with wires coming out of the camera into this three-cell holder. (I know that this sounds nuts ... but I am a rather nutty person; besides, I wanted to prove how smart I was in doing this 'waste avoidance'.) However, before I tested this voltage in the camera, I wanted to verify the power output, in comparison with the output from two fresh alkaline batteries. Again, I used a battery checker and found the output from the two fresh batteries to be slightly less than the output from the three slightly used batteries. This was as predicted. But to verify, I tested both battery sets with a 6 volt lantern bulb and, again, found the output of the three used batteries to cause the bulb to be a bit brighter than the output did from the two fresh akalines. This was what I had predicted, as the 'used' batteries had registered as almost new on the battery checker. I thoroughly checked all wiring and was ready to use the 4.5 voltage in the camera. In advance, I knew that this was risky: Would the 4.5 volts blow out the camera's circuitry?
The 4.5 volts proved, initially, to fire up the camera, but when I attempted to take a picture, the screen 'batteries exhausted' showed up. Of course, I was utterly amazed, because this three-set arrangement had tested a bit stronger than the two fresh alkalines. Miffed, I removed the three cell wiring from the camera and put into the camera the two fresh cells. It worked perfectly. I tested again and again and found the three 'used' cell arrangement to always show 'exhausted'; the two fresh cells worked perfectly despite the fact that the three cell arrangement always registered with a bit more power on traditional battery meters and bulbs.
With my limited knowledge of both electronics and digital technology, I am truly stumped. I had always thought that battery power was indicated in one way only: by testing on either a battery checker or with an incandescent bulb. Apparently, there is a certain 'power' that digital needs from its battery source that does not register on traditional meters. Apparently, fresh alkalines have this 'dark energy!!!' but used ones no longer have this dark power. My tests were done with complete accuracy but have been proven to show that there is 'some' power that digital cameras need which remains inscrutable and arcane (if not downright insane). Can anyone address this dilemma? - David Lyga
I have a few, very small cheap digital cameras which suit my needs well. When I acquired these, I made certain that each took two AA batteries because I did not want to bother with chargers for such limited use. I knew before I had bought these, as most will know, that AA alkalines do not last too long in these cameras, maybe about 40 shots per set. (I accept that and know that rechargeable batteries are available.) When the batteries are 'deficient' a screen warning shows, stating that 'batteries are exhausted'. Out of curiosity, I have always tested these 'exhausted' AA batteries on a battery tester and compared the readings with those from new alkalines. Amazingly, the reading difference was very slight and I could not really understand why the camera no longer saw the 'used' batteries as being sufficiently powerful.
Being ever frugal, I got thinking. If two 'used' batteries were insufficient, why not use THREE 'used' alkalines to bring back the power to proper strength and not have to segregate such 'used' batteries when they are still very good? (I certainly had enough used batteries lying around, as I do not generally discard such but use them for other things such as radios and flashlights.)
I bought a cheap three AA cell battery holder which would provide a 4.5 volt 'in series' output into the camera (NIKON CoolPix 3200). I figured a way to attach the camera's battery terminals correctly and securely, with wires coming out of the camera into this three-cell holder. (I know that this sounds nuts ... but I am a rather nutty person; besides, I wanted to prove how smart I was in doing this 'waste avoidance'.) However, before I tested this voltage in the camera, I wanted to verify the power output, in comparison with the output from two fresh alkaline batteries. Again, I used a battery checker and found the output from the two fresh batteries to be slightly less than the output from the three slightly used batteries. This was as predicted. But to verify, I tested both battery sets with a 6 volt lantern bulb and, again, found the output of the three used batteries to cause the bulb to be a bit brighter than the output did from the two fresh akalines. This was what I had predicted, as the 'used' batteries had registered as almost new on the battery checker. I thoroughly checked all wiring and was ready to use the 4.5 voltage in the camera. In advance, I knew that this was risky: Would the 4.5 volts blow out the camera's circuitry?
The 4.5 volts proved, initially, to fire up the camera, but when I attempted to take a picture, the screen 'batteries exhausted' showed up. Of course, I was utterly amazed, because this three-set arrangement had tested a bit stronger than the two fresh alkalines. Miffed, I removed the three cell wiring from the camera and put into the camera the two fresh cells. It worked perfectly. I tested again and again and found the three 'used' cell arrangement to always show 'exhausted'; the two fresh cells worked perfectly despite the fact that the three cell arrangement always registered with a bit more power on traditional battery meters and bulbs.
With my limited knowledge of both electronics and digital technology, I am truly stumped. I had always thought that battery power was indicated in one way only: by testing on either a battery checker or with an incandescent bulb. Apparently, there is a certain 'power' that digital needs from its battery source that does not register on traditional meters. Apparently, fresh alkalines have this 'dark energy!!!' but used ones no longer have this dark power. My tests were done with complete accuracy but have been proven to show that there is 'some' power that digital cameras need which remains inscrutable and arcane (if not downright insane). Can anyone address this dilemma? - David Lyga
Last edited: