Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    WI
    Posts
    1,965

    Fuji environmentally friendly AA batteries

    Fuji says they contains no environmentally harmful elements, and the digital alkalines are suitable for digital cameras because they are powerful and long lasting. But I don't see specifics about that last claim. How powerful and long lasting? If it's all true these sound good for $6 per pair.

    http://www.steves-digicams.com/digin...fuji_enviromax

    http://www.greenfuji.com/

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,132
    Alkaline?

    What's the point in making an "eco-friendly" alkaline that has to still be thrown away? Doesn't that defeat the purpose?

    Sorry, I'll stick with my Eneloops. I can recharge them hundreds of times (Sanyo claims 1,000) each instead of throwing them away after their first use. Isn't that eco-friendly?
    Nikon D300 | Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 | Nikkor AF-S 70-300mm VR | Nikkor AF 35mm f/2 D | SB-600 | Lowepro Voyager C | Lowepro Slingshot 300 AW

    For Sale:
    Nikkor AF 35mm f/2 D - Like New (FX compatible)

    Wish List
    Nikkor AF-S 17-55 f/2.8
    Nikkor AF-S 70-200 f/4 VRII
    Tokina AF 11-16 f/2.8
    SB-900 (2)
    Umbrellas
    New Tripod

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Visual Reality View Post
    Alkaline?

    What's the point in making an "eco-friendly" alkaline that has to still be thrown away? Doesn't that defeat the purpose?

    Sorry, I'll stick with my Eneloops. I can recharge them hundreds of times (Sanyo claims 1,000) each instead of throwing them away after their first use. Isn't that eco-friendly?
    +1 on that!
    Some Gear: Nikon D700; Nikkor AF-S 50 f/1.4 G; Nikkor AF-S 24-85 3.f/5-4.5 G ED; Tamron 28-300 f/3.5-6.3 VC; Nikon SB-800; Velbon Maxi-F; Canon Pixma Pro 9000; Canon S3IS, Canon SD500; Epson 4990; Epson P5000; Wacom Intuos 3

    Main Software: Capture NX2; Adobe PhotoShop CS2; Corel Paintshop Pro X2 Ultimate

    Sold: Canon XT/350D, EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, Sigma 18-200 OS; Canon ET EF 25II; Kenko Pro 300 DG, Canon 430EX, Canon BG-E3.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,132
    While I appreciate their efforts (we throw way too much s*** away and we only have so much earth to pile it up on), I just don't understand the point of using the R&D on alkalines?
    Nikon D300 | Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 | Nikkor AF-S 70-300mm VR | Nikkor AF 35mm f/2 D | SB-600 | Lowepro Voyager C | Lowepro Slingshot 300 AW

    For Sale:
    Nikkor AF 35mm f/2 D - Like New (FX compatible)

    Wish List
    Nikkor AF-S 17-55 f/2.8
    Nikkor AF-S 70-200 f/4 VRII
    Tokina AF 11-16 f/2.8
    SB-900 (2)
    Umbrellas
    New Tripod

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Somerset, England
    Posts
    718
    I'd suggest alkaline will make them more money as consumers have to re-buy when the batteries fail. Therefore, calling them 'environmentally friendly' (Which sounds like a pretty ridiculous thing to call a disposable battery ) will help to draw over customers and make more money. After all, the main aim of most businesses is profit.
    Gear List:
    Canon 40D + Sigma 18-50mm + Canon 55-250mm

    My Gallery

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    WI
    Posts
    1,965
    Quote Originally Posted by Visual Reality View Post
    What's the point in making an "eco-friendly" alkaline that has to still be thrown away? Doesn't that defeat the purpose?
    Since it doesn't contain harmful material, what is the harm in throwing it away? Just because it takes up landfill space?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,132
    Quote Originally Posted by bascom View Post
    Since it doesn't contain harmful material, what is the harm in throwing it away? Just because it takes up landfill space?
    And used up finite resources that are now thrown into a pile, yes.

    What do you have against rechargeables?
    Nikon D300 | Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 | Nikkor AF-S 70-300mm VR | Nikkor AF 35mm f/2 D | SB-600 | Lowepro Voyager C | Lowepro Slingshot 300 AW

    For Sale:
    Nikkor AF 35mm f/2 D - Like New (FX compatible)

    Wish List
    Nikkor AF-S 17-55 f/2.8
    Nikkor AF-S 70-200 f/4 VRII
    Tokina AF 11-16 f/2.8
    SB-900 (2)
    Umbrellas
    New Tripod

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    WI
    Posts
    1,965
    Yes rechargeables are still the best for cameras. I have nothing against them.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,132
    I didn't think so, but it sounded like you were saying these were a good deal at $6/pair. Then when they are used up I have to buy them again? Then again, and again? How expensive is that going to get and how many am I throwing in a landfill? Multiply that by millions of people doing the same and when is it going to end?

    Nothing personal against you...I just hate the waste that we turn our backs to.
    Nikon D300 | Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 | Nikkor AF-S 70-300mm VR | Nikkor AF 35mm f/2 D | SB-600 | Lowepro Voyager C | Lowepro Slingshot 300 AW

    For Sale:
    Nikkor AF 35mm f/2 D - Like New (FX compatible)

    Wish List
    Nikkor AF-S 17-55 f/2.8
    Nikkor AF-S 70-200 f/4 VRII
    Tokina AF 11-16 f/2.8
    SB-900 (2)
    Umbrellas
    New Tripod

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Formerly South Wales. Now South Carolina.
    Posts
    7,146
    I can't wait for the day they can produce cameras that consume so little power that we don't need to use batteries - they'll just have capacitors charged by gravity generators - the kind of gravity generator in the Seiko Kinetic series of watches. Simple body movement will be enough over the day to charge it to use through the day.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •