Originally posted by reh321 I wonder how the "K-3ii replacement" will compare to the Z-50 in battery life - which camera will be the "gas guzzler".
And that's why I wrote "of the DSLRs"
. MILCs all have terrible battery life for obvious reasons. In any case, for comparison's sake: the D7500 is rated at 950 shots with the
old battery, so with 20% more juice it would get around 1100. And that's not getting into the fact that the D7500 has flash (CIPA ratings use the onboard flash for 50% of shots). The D500 has a rating of 1240, so probably 1450 with the new battery... In Canonland, Canon 90D is rated to 1860 shots without flash.
The K-3ii is rated to 720. That's most likely the SR's fault, as Canikon don't have IBIS in their DSLRs (does lens IS influence as much as IBIS? Is it counted?). I know for a fact that the 6D lasts
substantially longer on a single battery than the K-1 in any case. When the 6D goes empty I'm halfway through the second battery...
---------- Post added 07-31-20 at 12:27 PM ----------
Originally posted by gatorguy Nikon needs more power for both video and mirrorless don't they, or they using a different battery in their MILC's?
The new battery is compatible with most of their DSLRs, so the MILCs are irrelevant for the comparison here.
---------- Post added 07-31-20 at 12:28 PM ----------
Originally posted by PentaxScott The internals of the battery are two 18500 cells. The technology (capacity) of those cells has advanced considerably since it was first used in the K-7. Im certain that higher capacity cells can be used in newer versions and for probably a cheaper cost than the older ones from 8 years ago.
Exactly. I don't expect them to charge less money, but around 2200 instead of 1860 would be appreciated... my phone has 3200 and the battery is smaller!