GL2 & XM2 Battery / Batteries

[Trond Saetre]

Thanks Don.
I guess both Jenna and I should check out the Lenmar battery.

And yes, those ratings are as you describe it "best-conditions rating".
But that goes for all brands, not only Canon or Lenmar.

[Don Palomaki]

Note that the LIC941 is not a good fit in the Canon XH A1 (marginally too large so it does not slide in/out reliably) in case you are considering an upgrade in the near future. The Lenmar LIC950G is more like 5200 mAh and may be a better fit for the XH A1.

[Trond Saetre]

Yes, there are several threads in the XH-A1 forum about non-Canon batteries not fitting.

[Alex Dolgin]

Originally Posted by Don Palomaki

Lenmar rates it at 6000 mAh, no doubt a best-conditions rating.

I've never done a definitive comparison test, but subjectively it has lasts at least as long as the Canon BP945, if not longer, on a full charge. But I rarely shoot more than a tape's worth in a single session, and if I do change tape, I usually change to a fresh battery at the same time.

Don, I actually have done fairly thorough testing of Lenmars, and found that they in fact deliver what their sticker claims within +/- 5%; this can not be said of the Ebay bought generics. Getting typically 60%-70% of their sticker claim.
HTH

[Don Palomaki]

Thanks Alex. Good to hear from you.

have you done any testing on degradation of Li ion over time; e.g., something like "you can typically expect the available capacity to fall off by 8% per year" as the battery ages.

[Alex Dolgin]

Don, I only am familiar with the numbers supplied by Sanyo. They have it about 10%/year if the battery is stored fully charged, 3%/year if it is stored at 40% charge. What I personally observed, is if the pack fails, it happens very quickly, in catastrophic manner. It is not normal aging, but some kind of hard failure in the electronics in it, or one of the cells pops.

[Jenna Klingensmith]

So it's between a BP9**.. and a Lenmar?

I suppose the VL-3 sounds better to me, I don't want a light that is to bright, just a sort of fill light for anything I film within 7-10 feet of like you said, BUT, I am a bit worried about it eating my battery, so are there other lights on the market that will fit my canon gl2? I like the idea of the light running on it's own battery in a way, but could I possibly find a softer light that does run on it's own battery? Or is the battery that the VL-3 takes up, not that much, so it wouldn't cut down my filming time by to much?

Thanks for answering my question about the charger, I noticed on ebay it's ALOT more expensive to purchase a battery with a charger, than just the battery alone, and without knowing I would have boughten one with a charger.. so thanks :)

[Graham Bernard]

Originally Posted by Jenna Klingensmith

I suppose the VL-3 sounds better to me, I don't want a light that is to bright, just a sort of fill light for anything I film within 7-10 feet of like you said, BUT, I am a bit worried about it eating my battery, so are there other lights on the market that will fit my canon gl2? I like the idea of the light running on it's own battery in a way, but could I possibly find a softer light that does run on it's own battery? Or is the battery that the VL-3 takes up, not that much, so it wouldn't cut down my filming time by to much?

A fill light helps to reduce contrast and to illuminate shadowy parts of the shot. The VL3 will most certainly NOT do that. In fact, in my experience what it will do is illuminate a face at 4>6 feet and then it drops off after 6 feet - that's my experince. If anything, where it IS working it would create MORE contrast with the shadowy parts still being low or dark. So, in my mind, the VL3 is the opposite to a fill light. One of the "advantages" of the VL3 is that it can be set in AUTO mode so it reduces the i8n-use period to a minimum.

However, you are asking the question that hits all of us at one time or another - "What IS the most appropriate lighting option for my needs?". Now often this is modified by budget. Like with mics - there ain't NO mic for ALL occasions - likewise, lights and usage are also often thought as being capable of doing ALL jobs. They can do MOST jobs but when it comes down to being selective about your lighting to create less grain, more definition and more fill, then the wallet often gets a hit. But sometimes this can be mitigated against with judicious finds on eBay or the like.

After 5 years I found an eBAy 50 Paglight. I got it for almost half price ( I think? ). And this was AFTER buying a piece of Cr$%p of a 20 minute usage piece of nonsense AND a PAglight C6 system. I now have this PAG50w wire to a lead acid battery. It works. It's not even ugly. This is far far cheaper than a battery-belt system - but LithIon, it ain't!

The other thing I keep forgetting to mention is that a fill-light works from the side - mostly 90 degs. IF you are asking about ON-camera lights, then they work, by definition, from the front. I guess what you are asking for, nit unreasonably, is a light that FILLS the scene/frame in front of you. Well, you need watts to do this and THEN you need something that will diffuse those watts DOWN. So, more watts to illuminate/fill and then slap on something that will reduce the overall illumination. Kinda contradictory - huh? If you look at ENG operatives interviewing politicians etc, they have BIG light heads and then diffusing stuff. But the end result is that the FACE of the talent is layered away from the background. Would you call that a fill? But it is illuminating the face nicely. The OTHER must have is a reflector and then someone to hold it. And this you will also see on more leisurely interviews - "Here, at "Buckingham palace" "White House" "UN", where you see the . . . in the background . . " that kinda of thing will sometimes stretch to a bloke/woman holding a reflector.

So, to recap:

a] Research - you are here, good! See what OTHERS on the ENG circuits do too!

b] Pragmatic - know your budget and maybe wait for the "right" thing to come along. It will!

Are you going to make mistakes? - Nah!! Of COURSE you are! Why should you be any different to any of us here? But hopefully you can mitigate against them too. Go see the other lighting forum here on DVINFO and buy Vic Milts "Light It Right!" instead of the VL3.

Cheers,

Grazie

[Jenna Klingensmith]

thanks for the input Graham. I did see some more expensive camera lights for the gl2 on ebay, but they seemed.. well.. somewhat large, and perhaps a bit to bright. I know that for the best lighting I can't rely on the on camera light, but for situations in which I otherwise couldn't set up lighting (not that i have a lighting set up yet anyways) I think it would be in my favor to at least have some illumination. Maybe I will put it off for a while until I come across something that seems right for me, i'd just have to be in a situation where I wish I had SOME additional lighting, but I suppose that will kind help me determine what kind of light i will need in the end..

thanks again

[Jarrod Whaley]

Originally Posted by Alex Dolgin

Don, I actually have done fairly thorough testing of Lenmars, and found that they in fact deliver what their sticker claims within +/- 5%; this can not be said of the Ebay bought generics. Getting typically 60%-70% of their sticker claim.

I'm sure you're right, but since you can get 3 or 4 generics for the same money, you're still getting much more battery life at the same price point. :)

In other words, a battery with 60% capacity that costs 1/4 as much will still give you quite a bit more bang for your buck.

[Don Palomaki]

More bang if it meets the minimum requirement for runtime. Having to change batteries mid tape is not always possible for longer form events, or a higher sudden failure rate may not be an acceptable risk for some users.

You pays your money and takes your chances.

[Jarrod Whaley]

Agreed, Don. But I'll add that I've been using generic BP-945's for years, and have run into no more problems with them than I have had with Canon batteries. Also, I have shot numerous multi-hour events with these batteries without having to switch. Worst case, you buy two of them and switch to a fresh one when you switch to your third tape. I have one of these batteries that I have been using almost daily for several years and only very lately has it begun to show signs of holding less of a charge than it used to. I have never heard of anyone having any real issues with cheap batteries for these cameras.

Sure, you can spend more money if you're afraid of a catastrophic failure. You can get Anton Bauers if you want to get super-finicky. Spend the money if you want, but meanwhile I'll be getting the same images as you are and will only have spent a fraction of the money that you did in order to get them. :)

I'm not dissing anyone who wants the added peace of mind, I'm just sharing my experience for the benefit of those who would prefer to spend a little of their money on things other than camera parts every now and then. :)

In sum, everything I have experienced in connection with these cheap batteries suggests that your camera is just as likely (if not more so!) to crap out as the batteries are. Take that for what it's worth; as always, your mileage may vary.

[Ben Rushby]

hi all, I've looked to see if there is any reference to these batteries on here, and couldn't find one.

http://www.inov8-memory.co.uk/batteries.php

they seem to have the onboard chip, and everything the originals have -
and do a 945 for £21

http://www.digiprintuk.com

do these take the risk out of buying completerly generic batteries whilst still being cheap and offering decent quality - anyone used them?

[Ben Rushby]

guess no ones ever heard of them then - didn't risk the cheapies after I found a hahnel bp945 equivalent on amazon for £28, cant go wrong at that price

[Graham Bernard]

Originally Posted by Ben Rushby

guess no ones ever heard of them then - didn't risk the cheapies after I found a hahnel bp945 equivalent on amazon for £28, cant go wrong at that price

When I first got my "Canon" BP945, £98, I looked around and ALSO found the HANEL option from Fotosense: http://www.fotosense.co.uk/

Something like 45 quid, then. When I received it and on closer inspection I noticed that BOTH the Fotosense battery AND the Canon BP945 (at £98!) are in a cover that BOTH have the "Hanel" word logo as part of the plastic-injection black cover! I've never forgotten that!

Can somebody confirm to me if Canon actually have a factory making these batteries? My feelings are that I maybe waiting a long time.

Grazie