[awscreo]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

The GRii uses the 1250 mAh DB-65 battery, which goes with a BJ-6 charger.

The GRiii uses the 1350 mAh DB-110 battery; our first hint that the GRiii was coming was when Ricoh registered the new BJ-11 charger
Ricoh registered new BATTERY CHARGER - PentaxForums.com

I see. Interesting that the battery capacity increased, yet we see a fairly significant drop in shots per charge. I guess Ibis is that power hungry.

[Kunzite]

The K-1 II got a decrease in shots per charge from 760 to 670, the difference being the accelerator unit.

[MMVIII]

I hope to avoid carrying 3 charges while traveling. Would be cool if I'll be able to get one with two battery slots, whether it's from ricoh or third party, less stuff to carry - less stuff that gets lost and forgotten in hotel rooms)

I have such a model (this one is the wrong one, but you get my point)
Akku + Dual-Ladegerät S005, DB-060 für: Amazon.de: Kamera
Perfect, tiny footprint, uses usb power and charges two batteries.

[awscreo]

I have such a model (this one is the wrong one, but you get my point)
Akku + Dual-Ladegerät S005, DB-060 für: Amazon.de: Kamera
Perfect, tiny footprint, uses usb power and charges two batteries.

Yup that's great! If that works with GRIII batteries I'll pick one up. Thanks!

[Rico]

Of course they are assumptions; I'm a software engineer, I know to recognize one
And this particular one is a wild, "what are you smoking?" type - there are so many differences between the Pentax and the Nikons I can't fathom how on Earth did you isolate the SD bus as the culprit. Actually, I know you didn't.

Kunzite so you are saying that UHS-II doesn't greatly improve the speed at which the files are written to the SD card? That some how it is something else that improved this for the D850 other than the improved storage bus? So why did Nikon move to the faster storage bus if it is not really needed? Of course you know that answer because you can not cram 50lbs of potato's into a 35lb sack. The only way to improve performance was to move to UHS-II. The XDQ slot is even faster.

Like I said Kunzite I have the K-1 so I know from experience the limitations of UHS-I. The biggest obstacle to using the K-1 is waiting on the SD bus to catch up. Waking from sleep you can here the system communicating: Press shutter release:Hello System time to wake up: System to storage unit time to wake up. Ok system storage unit is awake now. System okay Ready to go. It's glacial.

[reh321]

I hope to avoid carrying 3 charges while traveling. Would be cool if I'll be able to get one with two battery slots, whether it's from ricoh or third party, less stuff to carry - less stuff that gets lost and forgotten in hotel rooms)

I got a Watson charger and two D-Li68 plates when I got the Q-7.
I got a D-Li109 plate when I got the KP, so now I can charge one battery for each camera when I travel with both cameras.
It also provides a USB port so I can charge my smart phone also all off one 110 volt outlet.

[Rico]

The 2GB memory isn't ram, but ssd memory. A build in sd-card memory. To store images and not part of the image processing chain.

I know it isn't RAM. The system is always communicating back and forth to Storage. There is data on the storage the system accesses. Part of that internal storage can now be for system use instead of the SD card. UHS-I only operates in one direction at a time which is a bottleneck. The internal storage can bypass this latency.

[monochrome]

Are those batteries unique to GRIII? I didn't look it up, for some reason I thought they'd just use batteries from GRII, I think I'm off on that?

My dreams of traveling with a backpack and the least amounts of stuff is shattered

I think it is a new, higher capacity battery.

Travel light. Charge all night.

[Kunzite]

Kunzite so you are saying that UHS-II doesn't greatly improve the speed at which the files are written to the SD card? That some how it is something else that improved this for the D850 other than the improved storage bus? So why did Nikon move to the faster storage bus if it is not really needed? Of course you know that answer because you can not cram 50lbs of potato's into a 35lb sack. The only way to improve performance was to move to UHS-II. The XDQ slot is even faster.

Like I said Kunzite I have the K-1 so I know from experience the limitations of UHS-I. The biggest obstacle to using the K-1 is waiting on the SD bus to catch up. Waking from sleep you can here the system communicating: Press shutter release:Hello System time to wake up: System to storage unit time to wake up. Ok system storage unit is awake now. System okay Ready to go. It's glacial.

Have you read that claim in my posts? No? They, I'm not saying that.
But you were saying that UHS-II means a better battery life, with a bogus theory about images being held in RAM. I'm sorry, but we can't go guessing here, we can't use intuition as it doesn't work.

I have the K-1 (now upgraded to the K-1 II), too; you don't have to explain me its (lack of) speed. It's not capable of using the full (SDR-104) UHS-I speed, by the way.
Making up theories about how UHS-II would solve this or that is unneeded and even counter-productive; we don't have to look for any excuse other than increasing the write speed.

I'd be happy if the next model will have at least SDR-104 UHS-I, even if that means a further decline in battery life.

[awscreo]

I think it is a new, higher capacity battery.



Travel light. Charge all night.

I'm sure it'll be ok) I just frantically try to gather the funds to buy it asap

[Rico]

Have you read that claim in my posts? No? They, I'm not saying that.
But you were saying that UHS-II means a better battery life, with a bogus theory about images being held in RAM. I'm sorry, but we can't go guessing here, we can't use intuition as it doesn't work.

I have the K-1 (now upgraded to the K-1 II), too; you don't have to explain me its (lack of) speed. It's not capable of using the full (SDR-104) UHS-I speed, by the way.
Making up theories about how UHS-II would solve this or that is unneeded and even counter-productive; we don't have to look for any excuse other than increasing the write speed.

I'd be happy if the next model will have at least SDR-104 UHS-I, even if that means a further decline in battery life.

This is the problem with the Pentax community is satisfied with the next model having SDR-104 UHS-I. Clearly you are not interested in improving performance being satisfied with UHS-I SDR-104 even though this is the big complaint you have with the K-1.

What do you think the likely hood the GRIII will be using UHS-I SDR-104. It is the next camera. I think there is zero chance.

[phoebus]

The buffer is the RAM component no different than RAM in any computer system. When you start crunching data into RAM what happens to the RAM it heats up because it is drawing more power. It's no different in a camera.

There is a precedent for what I am pointing out when Nikon released the D500 and D850. Both those cameras had around a 25% increase in images per battery charge over the previous model even though there was no change to the battery. They moved to UHS-II which drastically cut down on clearing the buffer which improved the performance. The D800 was in the 15 second range to clear the full buffer. The D850 takes around 4 seconds. The savings in energy gave around a 25% increase in the total amount of images per battery charge.

Again that is another question I asked several times gone unanswered who here would rather have the buffer clear in 15 seconds or would you rather have the buffer clear in less than 5 seconds? Everyone here is satisfied with the buffer clearing in 15 seconds?

You seem to be making conclusions based on wild assumptions. To transfer data from RAM to NV requires energy; x bytes costs y microwatts (units for illustration - not actual). Are you claiming that UHS II uses less power per data transaction? The RAM is powered all the time the camera is on, it always holds data, whether it is allocated as buffer or something else. “Emptying” the buffer just transfers data from RAM to NV, the RAM is still there consuming power every refresh cycle. The SD card probably takes the same power to write data, though generally doing things faster consumes more power per cycle. You completely fail to make the case that emptying the buffer quickly saves power.

And yes, I would love to have faster write speed. Just don’t try to sell it as a way of saving power.

[OoKU]

??
GRIII Touch & Try in Beijing.

[Eyewanders]

Original launch pricing of the GR was $796.95 at B&H in 2013 for any hemming and hawing and/or wondering. I never regretted that pre-order but don't think I've the budget for it this time around unfortunately.

[BrianR]

You seem to be making conclusions based on wild assumptions. To transfer data from RAM to NV requires energy; x bytes costs y microwatts (units for illustration - not actual). Are you claiming that UHS II uses less power per data transaction?

I had linked to this earlier https://www.flashmemorysummit.com/English/Collaterals/Proceedings/2015/20150813_FL31_Pinto.pdf, it claims USH-II uses more power than UHS-I during a transfer but completes the transfer in much less time so ends up using less energy (20-40% savings depending on the operating mode). Finishing the transfer faster also lets the parts that can sleep or hibernate spend more time in low power mode. UHS-II is also supposed to have a lower powered hibernate mode - I guess the memory cards themselves can go to sleep when idle (it is non-volatile memory and I don't see that it needs to be powered when not in use, assuming it can get going fast enough when needed).

What overall savings this could have on the camera as a whole? I don't know, for all I know there might be other bits of hardware needed to support UHS-II that hurt on the power front. I couldn't find much more information comparing the two. The d800 vs d850 were cited as a comparison, but there's a whole crap ton of other things that changed between the two models (image processor, sensor, AF module) that isolating the I vs II power savings is something only the engineers would know.