SL power consumption

[MediaFotografie]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...first, I thought power consumption of the SL was not impressive, about 400 frames (or a little bit more). But yesterday I found the specs of Canon's new 1Dx mkII: 1210 frames - only with viewfinder; Live View: only 260!

 

http://nikonrumors.com/2016/02/05/nikon-d5-vs-canon-eos-1d-x-mark-ii-specifications-comparison.aspx/#more-101899

 

So compared to this SL's battery life time is very good.

 

[steppenw0lf]

Hi,

 

yes I agree, the power consumption seems ok. But I think Leica could even improve upon it, if they would offer a special power save mode (maybe it exists but I have not found it, yet). (Maybe I was just too lazy to dig deep enough into the menus.)

What worries me more, is the price for a spare akku (ok it's nothing compared to the camera price).

By the way my 5Ds seems to run longer on a full battery - but it's not in the same league,  .

Maybe my power save settings are not ideal for the SL. I would appreciate any hints regarding optimal power save setup.

 

Stephan

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Jared]

Performance on mirrorless cameras will generally be worse than DSLR's simply because the EVF is running so much.  Both the display and the imaging chip will be consuming significant amounts of power while you compose, etc., not just when you take a picture.  That's why Nikon and Canon are able to get 1,000+ pictures out of a single battery charge where Sony, Olympus, and now Leica get significantly less.  Makes sense, I suppose.  400 images isn't bad for a mirrorless camera, actually.  The Olympus OM-D E-M5, for example, is rated for 320 shots and I believe the Sony A7R II is rated at 290--so low that they include a second battery.  One shouldn't expect a mirrorless EVF camera to compete with the M or with a digital SLR on images per battery since nobody really wants to include huge batteries in their cameras.  Shooting for 350-400 as a rating seems to be pretty normal, and the SL is at the top end of that range.  Of course, it's a big, heavy camera--the downside.  

 

- Jared

[Peter Walker]

According to LR import, I just shot 666 images on one battery on my Leica SL.  All in about 2.5 hours - camera turned on the whole time.  GPS and WiFi on.   Using the 24-90 zoom on AF-S for most shots and the M WATE for a few.  EVF for all shots.  This battery has done about 20 cycles.  It was flashing red at the end.

 

If I was superstitious, I'd be worried about that 666.  But the images were all shot at a festival at a Buddhist temple so the devil could not have been involved...  

 

Regards

Peter

[LocalHero1953]

I find that the number of images is not a reliable measure of battery life, compared to the M. How long you are using it seems to be more closely correlated, probably because of the EVF. I have also just taken upwards of 600 images in 2-3hrs, with a battery that was not fully charged to start with and had life left at the end.

(I was deliberately taking a lot of shots for use in multiple exposure overlays in PS.)

But for all day use just walking around, I am more likely to need to change the battery than with my M.

[dfarkas]

I'd agree that length of time the camera is powered on seems to be more of a decisive factor in battery drain than just shooting off a large amount of images in bursts over a short period. When the SL is turned on, the sensor, onboard D/A, Maestro processor, EVF and display backlight are all using power. And, when you are actively composing shots, the AF, aperture control and OIS motors are also contributing to power drain. So, while many, including myself have gotten more than the stated 400 shots per charge on the SL, a useful statistic would be the number of active hours per charge with zero pictures taken. And, no, I haven't done this benchmark on my own...