Battery question re: CR-V3

[ju4dy]

I am a casual camera user, minimal skills. I got a dog earlier this year, he's cute and photogenic and i like to make photos of him. I like making photos in my living room which has low light, and at the dog park, which involves a lot of action. I'm wanting to upgrade to a camera that gets better pictures than the one i have. I have a Pentax S40 which i got about a year ago. I was replacing my first digital camera which had worn out and was big and bulky, a nikon Coolpix 950.

I mainly wanted something very easy to use for making photos for ebay auctions when i occasionally sell things. The camera has been perfect for my limited uses, i've loved it, it's very small and flat and fits in any pocket. But the picture quality isn't good. I read a review of it that says picture quality is not its strong suit. So i'm looking for another camera. A friend has a Canon sureshot A80 and the photos it takes are so clear, detailed, and the color seems so natural. So I'm interested in one of those, or a more recent incarnation of it.

That camera takes 4 AA batteries. The Pentax takes two AA batteries. But something i really love about the Pentax is that i can use CR-V3 batteries in it, wow, what a difference, i can shoot photos forever without the battery going dead. I have rechargeable CR-V3. It has so much longer battery life compared to any other kind. My question is, can CR-V3s be used in cameras that use AAs? On the box, it says the Pentax takes AAs, but in the manual it tells you you can use CR-V3s. That's how i found out about them, i never heard of them before.

I have been looking at specifications for different cameras and i never see CR-V3s mentioned in the specifications of any of the cameras i looked at. Yet a CR-V3 is like two double AAs. That's what i'm trying to find out, can i use CR-V3s with cameras that take AAs, and why don't i ever read anything about using them with the cameras i have seen reviewed? Is there some problem with them that explains why people don't seem to use them, or talk about them? Once i started using them, i have felt i would never want to go back to any other kind of battery because i can get so many times more photos on a battery with CR-V3s.

[Sintares]

The battery compartment would need to be the proper size and shape.

See, http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/rcrv3.html

[AlexMonro]

Some reviews mention in the text wether a camera will take CR-V3s - e.g. the review of the Olympus SP-350 on this site: http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/sp350-review/

That actually suggests using NiMH AA rechargeables, however, I've found that the voltage of the NiMH cells (approx 1.4V when charged) seems to be too low, it actually needs the 3.0V+ of the CR-V3 to power it for more than a few minutes. I got a rechargeable CR-V3 for my SP-350.

Your best bet is to read through the battery sections of all the reviews of cameras you're interested in, and then, if it only mentions AAs, ask a specific question on the forum for that manufacturer.

[ju4dy]

thanks for the replies and links. I had wanted to get a Canon powershot A series camera, they take AAs so i had hoped they would also take CR V3s, in fact at first i thought that if a camera takes AAs they'll also take CR V3s. But none of the Canons take CR V3s. I went to three camera stores and asked to be shown cameras that take CR V3s, but the choices were very minimal. I was open to getting any brand that has what i'm looking for. I was told the camera makers are steering away from CR V3s. Why would that be? They seem to be very superior to the other batteries for the important purposes of holding their charges and having way more power for much longer use time. Why wouldn't camera makers want users to have this benefit and advantage? It doesn't appear that much difference in manufacture would be involved, and for such a big advantage, why not? However it doesn't seem to me that this is a very big thing that users are demanding anyway, so i guess that's why the companies aren't making it. But i think a lot of users don't know about them. Every time i tell someone about them, and how i never have to worry about running out of battery power, they have not heard of these before. I don't understand why, if there is such superior technology that would improve the use experience so greatly, it's not being provided. The only brand i was told has a few models that can use CR V3s was Olympus. And the sales person kind of steered me away from Olympus, not exactly saying why. I looked at the review for the SP 350 and it sounds really nice. The only thing that doesn't work for me is that it's described as sluggish in performance and operation, it's not a fast camera. The canons i looked at were described as fast or at worst, average. I know there have to be trade offs. But would CR V3s be related to slower camera speeds? I don't see why. but it's not something i would know, technically, of course.

[AlexMonro]

I would agree that the SP350 is best described as "sluggish" - especially if you save in RAW mode. Definitely not an action camera, but it does take some very nice landscape pictures (see image).

I don't know why few manufacturers allow the use of CRV3s, unless it's because NiMH AA rechargeables are cheaper, and, as I discovered, they seem to requive a slightly different designed operating voltage.

[Norm in Fujino]

I've had two Olympus cameras now that use CR-V3s, and also an Olympus flash that uses them. They're quite a bit more expensive than AAs, obviously, but they have greater power and last much longer; they're supposed to have low battery drain when not in use as well.