Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
3rd Party Batteries for the Canon 7D Mk2
Nov 30, 2014 12:17:02   #
dkguill Loc: Elkhart, IN
 
I read earlier in an UH comment that someone was observing battery drain with the 7D Mk2 and the new E6n battery. I recently purchased a 7Dmk2 and have noticed that my battery does seem to lose at least some power while just sitting with the camera turned off. I do NOT have the GPS on. I have noted that the LP-E6n is rated at 1865mAh. I also read that Canon's alleged response has been to say that batteries should always be charged prior to each shoot and that batteries normally lose power when not in use over time.

All of that said, I would simply observe the following: The Canon LP-E6 battery supplied for my 5D Mk 2 is rated at 1800mAh and it clearly works with the new 7D Mk2. The difference between the new "n" battery and the regular E6 is only 65mAh. So I have placed a regular E6 battery in the 7D mk2 and found that there is no apparent loss of power over several days of sitting in the camera in the off position. As a result, I tried the same thing with an old 3rd party battery from my 5D with similar results. By the way, these 3rd party batteries are so old that they show marginal recharge evaluations in the in-camera battery test. I have also used these 3rd party batteries rated at 1400mAh for a couple of years in my 5D mk2 with quite satisfactory results. These batteries have the chip that allows communication with the camera and they have been quite good.

As a result, I just ordered a pair 3rd party Vivitar batteries rated at 2000mAh which are shipped with a home/car charger and they will charge in either the standard Canon charger or the Vivitar charger. While I haven't had time to test their durability and performance over time, they appear to do well and they have the communication chip built into them. The attractive thing to me is, while the Canon LP-E6n sells for about $75.00, these Vivitar batteries with charger cost me $29.95 for the pair. They arrived with a 50% charge. I topped them off using the Vivitar charger for one and the Canon charger for the other. They both completed their respective charges in about the same period of time and they both appear to be working as advertised. You can find them at http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0041EDRQ0/ref=pe_825000_114665720_TE_item .

I hasten to admit that I have not properly tested these Vivitar batteries, but they so far seem to work well. Even if their 2000mAh rating is exaggerated, they appear to be at least adequate. The fact that I can buy 4 of these for the cost of one Canon battery leads me to believe that, even if they only last a couple of years, they aren't a bad deal. I plan to do an A/B comparison between the "n" battery and these new Vivitar items measuring frame count and overall performance. I thought there might be others out there who have tried these batteries and have comments or those who might like to at least know about them. I am so far a bit skeptical about the cost/value relationship associated with the new LP-E6n battery pack vs. the established E6 version.

I have heard some comments earlier about Canon trying to use firmware updates to disable 3rd party batteries, but I have no information as to whether that is more than just rumor at this point. Anyone in the know in that regard?

Reply
Nov 30, 2014 12:25:25   #
speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho
 
dkguill wrote:
I read earlier in an UH comment that someone was observing battery drain with the 7D Mk2 and the new E6n battery. I recently purchased a 7Dmk2 and have noticed that my battery does seem to lose at least some power while just sitting with the camera turned off. I do NOT have the GPS on. I have noted that the LP-E6n is rated at 1865mAh. I also read that Canon's alleged response has been to say that batteries should always be charged prior to each shoot and that batteries normally lose power when not in use over time.

All of that said, I would simply observe the following: The Canon LP-E6 battery supplied for my 5D Mk 2 is rated at 1800mAh and it clearly works with the new 7D Mk2. The difference between the new "n" battery and the regular E6 is only 65mAh. So I have placed a regular E6 battery in the 7D mk2 and found that there is no apparent loss of power over several days of sitting in the camera in the off position. As a result, I tried the same thing with an old 3rd party battery from my 5D with similar results. By the way, these 3rd party batteries are so old that they show marginal recharge evaluations in the in-camera battery test. I have also used these 3rd party batteries rated at 1400mAh for a couple of years in my 5D mk2 with quite satisfactory results. These batteries have the chip that allows communication with the camera and they have been quite good.

As a result, I just ordered a pair 3rd party Vivitar batteries rated at 2000mAh which are shipped with a home/car charger and they will charge in either the standard Canon charger or the Vivitar charger. While I haven't had time to test their durability and performance over time, they appear to do well and they have the communication chip built into them. The attractive thing to me is, while the Canon LP-E6n sells for about $75.00, these Vivitar batteries with charger cost me $29.95 for the pair. They arrived with a 50% charge. I topped them off using the Vivitar charger for one and the Canon charger for the other. They both completed their respective charges in about the same period of time and they both appear to be working as advertised. You can find them at http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0041EDRQ0/ref=pe_825000_114665720_TE_item .

I hasten to admit that I have not properly tested these Vivitar batteries, but they so far seem to work well. Even if their 2000mAh rating is exaggerated, they appear to be at least adequate. The fact that I can buy 4 of these for the cost of one Canon battery leads me to believe that, even if they only last a couple of years, they aren't a bad deal. I plan to do an A/B comparison between the "n" battery and these new Vivitar items measuring frame count and overall performance. I thought there might be others out there who have tried these batteries and have comments or those who might like to at least know about them. I am so far a bit skeptical about the cost/value relationship associated with the new LP-E6n battery pack vs. the established E6 version.

I have heard some comments earlier about Canon trying to use firmware updates to disable 3rd party batteries, but I have no information as to whether that is more than just rumor at this point. Anyone in the know in that regard?
I read earlier in an UH comment that someone was o... (show quote)

Not just a rumor, Nikon is doing a similar thing, I don't mind as I never use 3rd party batteries/anything.

Reply
Nov 30, 2014 12:26:36   #
Newsbob Loc: SF Bay Area
 
I have neem using Wasabi replacement batteries for about a year in my Canon 5D and Canon video camera with no problems at all. Lots of positive comments on Amazon as well. I've found their customer service folks to be very responsive when I had a question. Highly recommended.and so far, at least, no interference by Canon that I'm aware of.

Reply
 
 
Nov 30, 2014 13:06:04   #
dkguill Loc: Elkhart, IN
 
Thanks for the suggestion and comment. I have heard of the Wasabi batteries and all comments seem to have been good. I purchased these Vivitar batteries mostly out of curiosity and in reaction to the price. $29.95 seemed like a relatively low risk and I might be pleasantly surprised. Thanks again.

Reply
Nov 30, 2014 13:12:53   #
dkguill Loc: Elkhart, IN
 
Am I correct that such a dastardly deed would come from a firmware update? It saddens me to think that these reputable companies would feel the need to stand on the necks of those trying to legitimately compete in a free market environment. I certainly understand and respect your opinion regarding 3rd party substitutes. It isn't unusual to be stung by substandard performance in such products. You are probably wise in the long run.

I have to wonder, however, if the next step is for Canon and Nikon to render third party lenses inoperable in some similar way. Seems to me that their valuable time could be better spent improving the performance of their products and not preventing competition. Ah, well, "business" in America.

Reply
Dec 1, 2014 08:36:14   #
Jtrim Loc: Elmira Heights, NY
 
It is called COMPETITION & that's the American way.

Reply
Dec 1, 2014 09:50:48   #
dkguill Loc: Elkhart, IN
 
What you say is true. Competition is indeed the American way. My experience is that resources used to prevent progress/competitive creativity tends to be very costly when compared to resources applied to moving forward with new products and new ideas. There is little doubt in my mind that the big guys have the right to protect their patents, and copyrights and to prevent others from stealing intellectual property. Still, when third party developers use their efforts to improve through processes and design that leads to reduced costs, the big guys stand to benefit as well. I always found that my company was better served when utilizing resources to look for new alternatives and new product design. That's all I'm saying. Competition is a good thing and we all tend to benefit from it. It all doesn't tend to come from one place however.

My other point was to suggest that an alternative 3rd party product might have merit through reduced consumer costs and comparable, if not better, performance. It just disappoints me to think that preventing competitive efforts is a worthy endeavor.

Reply
 
 
Dec 1, 2014 13:15:30   #
RRS Loc: Not sure
 
dkguill wrote:
I read earlier in an UH comment that someone was observing battery drain with the 7D Mk2 and the new E6n battery. I recently purchased a 7Dmk2 and have noticed that my battery does seem to lose at least some power while just sitting with the camera turned off. I do NOT have the GPS on. I have noted that the LP-E6n is rated at 1865mAh. I also read that Canon's alleged response has been to say that batteries should always be charged prior to each shoot and that batteries normally lose power when not in use over time.

All of that said, I would simply observe the following: The Canon LP-E6 battery supplied for my 5D Mk 2 is rated at 1800mAh and it clearly works with the new 7D Mk2. The difference between the new "n" battery and the regular E6 is only 65mAh. So I have placed a regular E6 battery in the 7D mk2 and found that there is no apparent loss of power over several days of sitting in the camera in the off position. As a result, I tried the same thing with an old 3rd party battery from my 5D with similar results. By the way, these 3rd party batteries are so old that they show marginal recharge evaluations in the in-camera battery test. I have also used these 3rd party batteries rated at 1400mAh for a couple of years in my 5D mk2 with quite satisfactory results. These batteries have the chip that allows communication with the camera and they have been quite good.

As a result, I just ordered a pair 3rd party Vivitar batteries rated at 2000mAh which are shipped with a home/car charger and they will charge in either the standard Canon charger or the Vivitar charger. While I haven't had time to test their durability and performance over time, they appear to do well and they have the communication chip built into them. The attractive thing to me is, while the Canon LP-E6n sells for about $75.00, these Vivitar batteries with charger cost me $29.95 for the pair. They arrived with a 50% charge. I topped them off using the Vivitar charger for one and the Canon charger for the other. They both completed their respective charges in about the same period of time and they both appear to be working as advertised. You can find them at http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0041EDRQ0/ref=pe_825000_114665720_TE_item .

I hasten to admit that I have not properly tested these Vivitar batteries, but they so far seem to work well. Even if their 2000mAh rating is exaggerated, they appear to be at least adequate. The fact that I can buy 4 of these for the cost of one Canon battery leads me to believe that, even if they only last a couple of years, they aren't a bad deal. I plan to do an A/B comparison between the "n" battery and these new Vivitar items measuring frame count and overall performance. I thought there might be others out there who have tried these batteries and have comments or those who might like to at least know about them. I am so far a bit skeptical about the cost/value relationship associated with the new LP-E6n battery pack vs. the established E6 version.

I have heard some comments earlier about Canon trying to use firmware updates to disable 3rd party batteries, but I have no information as to whether that is more than just rumor at this point. Anyone in the know in that regard?
I read earlier in an UH comment that someone was o... (show quote)


Another point to ponder, are you using Canon lenses on your new camera?? Why may you ask, it has been reported in other posts that leaving a third party lenses on over night does cause the battery to drain down flat. The third party company has been made aware of this problem and is working on a fix. I wouldn't use an over rated battery unless you knew the component values on the circuit board in the camera. A 50 ohm resistor can be 1/4 to 10 watts or more and another good check would be to test the voltage of the fully charged batteries.

Reply
Dec 1, 2014 13:32:26   #
LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY
 
dkguill wrote:
Am I correct that such a dastardly deed would come from a firmware update? It saddens me to think that these reputable companies would feel the need to stand on the necks of those trying to legitimately compete in a free market environment. I certainly understand and respect your opinion regarding 3rd party substitutes. It isn't unusual to be stung by substandard performance in such products. You are probably wise in the long run.

I have to wonder, however, if the next step is for Canon and Nikon to render third party lenses inoperable in some similar way. Seems to me that their valuable time could be better spent improving the performance of their products and not preventing competition. Ah, well, "business" in America.
Am I correct that such a dastardly deed would come... (show quote)


This was discussed some time ago. What I recall is that the bottom line is that Canon cameras will only communicate with after-market batteries that have been approved by Canon and have the proper chip coding, apparently supplied to the manufacturer by Canon. A quality control measure, it seems, to make less reputable brands less desirable to the consumer. Just the same, they will all power up the camera and do no harm, unless they leak. Other then unsubstantiated, often near hysterical claims by some members I have heard of no instances where Canon has tried to force consumers to buy only Canon batteries. B&H often supplies a spare Watson battery with new Canons. Being an authorized Canon dealer they wouldn't do that if Canon opposed it.
As far a slight loss of charge with the new "N" battery, I suppose that one possibility is that the battery's internal circuitry may actually draw a slight bit of current in this new configuration.

Reply
Dec 1, 2014 22:46:54   #
MarkD Loc: NYC
 
Don't skimp on the cheap stuff.

Reply
Dec 2, 2014 00:01:12   #
ricsha Loc: Central Oregon Coast
 
MarkD wrote:
Don't skimp on the cheap stuff.


This!

Reply
 
 
Dec 2, 2014 20:32:07   #
jsharp Loc: Ballwin MO.
 
dkguill wrote:
Am I correct that such a dastardly deed would come from a firmware update? It saddens me to think that these reputable companies would feel the need to stand on the necks of those trying to legitimately compete in a free market environment. I certainly understand and respect your opinion regarding 3rd party substitutes. It isn't unusual to be stung by substandard performance in such products. You are probably wise in the long run.

I have to wonder, however, if the next step is for Canon and Nikon to render third party lenses inoperable in some similar way. Seems to me that their valuable time could be better spent improving the performance of their products and not preventing competition. Ah, well, "business" in America.
Am I correct that such a dastardly deed would come... (show quote)


HP did a similar thing a frimware update made the use of non-hp ink cartridges less reliable as the print will not tell you the ink level.

Reply
Dec 6, 2014 23:53:08   #
Dun1 Loc: Atlanta, GA
 
You just got a $1,800 camera body why take the risk of some 3rd party battery frying your camera. If you had a new Porsche, that specifies premium fuel would you fill up with cheap regular grade fuel from a no name gas station.
Some third party batteries will no communicate with the camera and give a reading of how much power you have left in your battery,

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.