Shel, It's the rechargable CR-V3's that aren't recommended for the DSLR's, because of excess voltage (they're 3.6V instead of 3V for Lithium CR-V3's). And they do Af a bit quicker. NiMH AA's are indeed recommended for use in the *istD's and the K1x0D's.
-Adam Shel Belinkoff wrote: > How do they compare with the same batteries? It seems that, in the past, > someone used NiMH bats that were a little "hotter" than the standard CRV-3 > bats and claimed to have gotten faster autofocus. Several people noted, > iirc, that NiMH bats (maybe rechargeable ones)were not recommended for the > istD cameras. Are they an acceptable and recommended option for the new > K***D cameras? > > Being able to focus better in low light is a definite plus. > > Shel > > > > >>[Original Message] >>From: Asad Masede > > >>Well, I can't (and won't) do any timed tests, but the K100D is much >>better at low light AF than the last gen of Pentax DSLRs. I have an *ist >>DS and it has trouble locking onto subjects when it's dark, and when it >>does lock-on, it's slow; the K100D on the other hand, locks on very >>quickly even in low-light situations. Another thing is that the AF motor >>seems to have been replaced with a much faster one, higher pitched whine >>but it's fast, faster with NiMH batteries than the DS is with CRV-3s. I >>haven't done any tests or trials, but I use both cameras day-in-day-out >>and the difference is very noticeable. > > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
