[rollei_list] Re: Batteries

I have had the same experience and agree with this. However my own
tests of some of the older camera meters (such as on the F1, FTBn,
several Konica rangefinders, etc) with NOS refrigerated mercury
batteries revealed them inaccurate through a good part of the range
with the original cells. So much of this is the nature of the beast
with old technology meters and not compensating for the voltage
issue...


Eric Goldstein

--

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 9:54 AM, Austin Franklin
<austin.franklin@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I have come to the same conclusion about ZO batteries.  I won't use them.
> But, I have found that simply "recalibrating" (which means different things)
> to a higher voltage battery does not always yield the "correct" results
> across the entire exposure range.
>
> What is typically done with "recalibrating" is simply adjusting the metering
> system (via mechanical means or some electronic means) for the difference in
> voltage "offset" at one point in the metering range.  This may or may not
> work for a particular camera.  For the Canon F1 for example, it does not.
> It may be close enough for most of the range though.  And the Canon F1 is a
> mechanical "recalibration".  What I've found, is for mechanical
> recalibration, there is always significant error for a good part of the
> range, typically the ends if you calibrate for the middle.  For electronic
> recalibration, that is very dependant on the circuitry, and it stands a
> better chance of higher accuracy across the entire range than a mechanical
> recalibration.
>
> Let's not confuse accuracy with consistency.  Even if a meter is inaccurate,
> it can still be consistent.
>
> Some cameras, like the Canon EF, are simply plug and play.  The circuitry
> has a wider tolerance for input voltage (some claim it has a voltage
> regulator, but there is no proof of that, and I have the schematics and
> circuit boards etc., and find no regulator, unless it is embedded in the one
> IC in the circuit, which I doubt), and the meter readings are the same for
> mercury or silver oxide, with no adjustment.
>
> Regards,
>
> Austin
> ---
> Rollei List
>
> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Online, searchable archives are available at
> http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>
>
---
Rollei List

- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list

Other related posts: