EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
I bet if a few hundred recent DSLR purchasers updated their firmware, then sent the cameras back to Amazon, saying that the firmware update caused their camera to stop recognizing batteries, Canon would change their tune pretty quickly. And by "quickly", I mean that with a few hundred returns, Amazon would automatically yank the affected products off the market pending an investigation, which would make it the single most expensive mistake any Canon exec ever made....
IMO, it's a mistake to call battery and lens manufacturers "competitors". Canon isn't a battery manufacturer. It's a camera manufacturer. They build minor accessories, such as batteries, for one reason and one reason only: because the batteries must exist for the cameras to be usable. Accessory makers expand their ecosystem and make their actual core products more desirable. Anything that Canon does to harm those accessory makers harms Canon doubly.
The situation with Canon and lens/battery/flash manufacturers is a bit like Apple with third-party software makers. Microsoft Office '08 and Photoshop CS3 still work in the very latest version of OS X even though they are both over half a decade old. And there are plenty of Windows users out there who still run random apps from even farther back. The reason those old apps still work is that companies like Apple and Microsoft go out of their way to minimize breakage of third-party software.
IMO, Canon has a similar responsibility to minimize breaking of third-party accessories unless it is truly unavoidable. Anything less is unconscionably abusive.
Indeed, that's almost invariably the case. Unless Canon managed to find some way to break compatibility repeatedly and often, it isn't likely to appreciably hurt Sigma's sales. If anything, it helps Sigma by breaking compatibility for their older products, thus forcing users to buy new lenses (most of which probably won't be Canon's, because if cost were no object, they would have bought Canon lenses to begin with). Worse, it hurts Canon's lens sales by forcing users to replace their existing low-end lenses for no reason instead of spending that money towards more expensive lenses that might actually be exclusive to Canon.
Now obviously the same logic doesn't really apply to batteries, but I dare say that given how hard it is to actually obtain genuine Canon batteries, this won't significantly increase Canon's battery sales. Either way, IMO, the battery situation is just a symptom of a much larger problem with the way Canon's upper management sees its customers. These sorts of vendor lock-in games tend to be a quick path to bankruptcy for most companies that are foolish enough to play them, and Canon would be wise to correct this craniorectal inversion sooner, rather than later, before the bad taste it leaves in their customers' mouths causes many to reconsider their relationship with Canon's products.
I bet if a few hundred recent DSLR purchasers updated their firmware, then sent the cameras back to Amazon, saying that the firmware update caused their camera to stop recognizing batteries, Canon would change their tune pretty quickly. And by "quickly", I mean that with a few hundred returns, Amazon would automatically yank the affected products off the market pending an investigation, which would make it the single most expensive mistake any Canon exec ever made....
Rudeofus said:
IMO, it's a mistake to call battery and lens manufacturers "competitors". Canon isn't a battery manufacturer. It's a camera manufacturer. They build minor accessories, such as batteries, for one reason and one reason only: because the batteries must exist for the cameras to be usable. Accessory makers expand their ecosystem and make their actual core products more desirable. Anything that Canon does to harm those accessory makers harms Canon doubly.
The situation with Canon and lens/battery/flash manufacturers is a bit like Apple with third-party software makers. Microsoft Office '08 and Photoshop CS3 still work in the very latest version of OS X even though they are both over half a decade old. And there are plenty of Windows users out there who still run random apps from even farther back. The reason those old apps still work is that companies like Apple and Microsoft go out of their way to minimize breakage of third-party software.
IMO, Canon has a similar responsibility to minimize breaking of third-party accessories unless it is truly unavoidable. Anything less is unconscionably abusive.
Rudeofus said:
Indeed, that's almost invariably the case. Unless Canon managed to find some way to break compatibility repeatedly and often, it isn't likely to appreciably hurt Sigma's sales. If anything, it helps Sigma by breaking compatibility for their older products, thus forcing users to buy new lenses (most of which probably won't be Canon's, because if cost were no object, they would have bought Canon lenses to begin with). Worse, it hurts Canon's lens sales by forcing users to replace their existing low-end lenses for no reason instead of spending that money towards more expensive lenses that might actually be exclusive to Canon.
Now obviously the same logic doesn't really apply to batteries, but I dare say that given how hard it is to actually obtain genuine Canon batteries, this won't significantly increase Canon's battery sales. Either way, IMO, the battery situation is just a symptom of a much larger problem with the way Canon's upper management sees its customers. These sorts of vendor lock-in games tend to be a quick path to bankruptcy for most companies that are foolish enough to play them, and Canon would be wise to correct this craniorectal inversion sooner, rather than later, before the bad taste it leaves in their customers' mouths causes many to reconsider their relationship with Canon's products.
Upvote
0
Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
dgatwood makes some excellent points but first, I think the technical term 'craniorectal inversion' should be noted and given bonus points. Excellent! ;D
I've been busy and so I'm catching up on this thread. In general, dgatwood's comments on this from the beginning are logical and appropriate. Accessories are part of the whole camera market. They shouldn't be marginalized by Canon or any other camera maker. If one considers this topic from both sides without emotion, it's pretty obvious what's going on. There are really no clear winners when this kind of thing occurs. Whether the user always buys 100% Canon or not, these kind of tactics usually punish everyone, esp if unforeseen collateral problems develop. It's just a short sighted idea that ultimately results in very little benefit for everyone. Like the poor novice that is crestfallen when they think something is wrong with their new camera at Christmas and end up returning it as defective like dgatwood suggested. Now Canon may have just shown a new buyer that their product is faulty out of the box (when it really isn't).
IMO, there are two or three camps of buyers for DSLRs. The novices, the pros and the 'pro-sumers' in between. All of these groups buy 3rd party accessories for their DSLR for a variety of reasons and have for decades. Canon knows most everyone won't jump ship over this but won't appreciate it either.
The novices will buy a Canon battery because it's the safe call. One. Likely the one extra they think they need but will probably never use because they never use the camera except at special events or holidays to take less than 100 frames. They may have just bought a Canon battery anyway at the same time the bought the camera. So no big change or increase in that market for Canon. However, if they bought a 3rd party battery, they may think the camera is bad and just return the whole kit and buy something else. They aren't invested in a system, they just want a camera that doesn't have problems.
The pros either always bought Canon batteries before or they didn't. And that won't change as a result of Canon's little tactic either for many of the reasons stated here in this thread. $40 increase times 5 batteries is significant so the battery message will just be endured, or Canon batteries simply aren't available, etc.
That leaves the 'pro-sumers'. More than likely, these are the only ones that might actually pony up more money for the Canon batteries and even replace their existing 3rd party batteries. Why? Because the 'pro-sumer' market buys most of this stuff because they want it, not because they need it or even use it that much. It's a toy. Even if they do use it a lot, they want it all to work perfect. 'Pro-sumers' buy all the extra goodies and likely have special luggage just for the trip to the neighbors house. The backpacks, special straps, covers, hoods, etc. And there's nothing wrong with that! But I guess Canon thinks that the 'pro-sumers' are going to buy a hell of a lot of batteries because I don't see the other two parts of Canon's buyer market changing much. Not changing much except to perhaps hate on Canon a bit in blogs and forums and wonder what they did to deserve such treatment after giving Canon so much of their money. So thanks for the love Canon!
dgatwood makes some excellent points but first, I think the technical term 'craniorectal inversion' should be noted and given bonus points. Excellent! ;D
I've been busy and so I'm catching up on this thread. In general, dgatwood's comments on this from the beginning are logical and appropriate. Accessories are part of the whole camera market. They shouldn't be marginalized by Canon or any other camera maker. If one considers this topic from both sides without emotion, it's pretty obvious what's going on. There are really no clear winners when this kind of thing occurs. Whether the user always buys 100% Canon or not, these kind of tactics usually punish everyone, esp if unforeseen collateral problems develop. It's just a short sighted idea that ultimately results in very little benefit for everyone. Like the poor novice that is crestfallen when they think something is wrong with their new camera at Christmas and end up returning it as defective like dgatwood suggested. Now Canon may have just shown a new buyer that their product is faulty out of the box (when it really isn't).
IMO, there are two or three camps of buyers for DSLRs. The novices, the pros and the 'pro-sumers' in between. All of these groups buy 3rd party accessories for their DSLR for a variety of reasons and have for decades. Canon knows most everyone won't jump ship over this but won't appreciate it either.
The novices will buy a Canon battery because it's the safe call. One. Likely the one extra they think they need but will probably never use because they never use the camera except at special events or holidays to take less than 100 frames. They may have just bought a Canon battery anyway at the same time the bought the camera. So no big change or increase in that market for Canon. However, if they bought a 3rd party battery, they may think the camera is bad and just return the whole kit and buy something else. They aren't invested in a system, they just want a camera that doesn't have problems.
The pros either always bought Canon batteries before or they didn't. And that won't change as a result of Canon's little tactic either for many of the reasons stated here in this thread. $40 increase times 5 batteries is significant so the battery message will just be endured, or Canon batteries simply aren't available, etc.
That leaves the 'pro-sumers'. More than likely, these are the only ones that might actually pony up more money for the Canon batteries and even replace their existing 3rd party batteries. Why? Because the 'pro-sumer' market buys most of this stuff because they want it, not because they need it or even use it that much. It's a toy. Even if they do use it a lot, they want it all to work perfect. 'Pro-sumers' buy all the extra goodies and likely have special luggage just for the trip to the neighbors house. The backpacks, special straps, covers, hoods, etc. And there's nothing wrong with that! But I guess Canon thinks that the 'pro-sumers' are going to buy a hell of a lot of batteries because I don't see the other two parts of Canon's buyer market changing much. Not changing much except to perhaps hate on Canon a bit in blogs and forums and wonder what they did to deserve such treatment after giving Canon so much of their money. So thanks for the love Canon!
Upvote
0
josephandrews222
I Shot the Sheriff, but I Did Not Shoot the Deputy
Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
I am a bit confused about your post.
The 5d Mark III's latest firmware is 1.2.3, I think. It has only been in the wild for a few weeks, not a few months (I think).
I own the 5d3 running 1.2.1 (which has been out for several months). 1.2.1 is nicely compatible with all four of my Wasabi batteries, which were purchased 4 months ago.
Can you re-confirm that 1.2.3 and Wasabi batteries play nice?
jthomson said:
I am a bit confused about your post.
The 5d Mark III's latest firmware is 1.2.3, I think. It has only been in the wild for a few weeks, not a few months (I think).
I own the 5d3 running 1.2.1 (which has been out for several months). 1.2.1 is nicely compatible with all four of my Wasabi batteries, which were purchased 4 months ago.
Can you re-confirm that 1.2.3 and Wasabi batteries play nice?
Upvote
0
Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
I think the point is that nobody really can confirm that for sure.
I have 6 replacement batteries, where two of them were originals (coming with an EOS 60D and the EOS 5D III), two being original and two of them third party.
I also own a grip for both of them and just wanted to have the third party batteries on hand for the originals being empty unexpectedly.
First I had no issue with any of them.
After a certain upgrade-level of the firmware, as well at the EOS 60D as at the EOS 5D III I got the notification with three of them.
And you are counting right when you notice that at least one of the 'originals' is causing the notification. Both of the originals where bought at the same retailer (which is quite a big one) at the same time.
And I am getting the notification also for quite a few months. This did not start with the last firmware upgrade for me (Please: I'm talking about myself only.)
But with the grip, which are also original ones it's really annoying.
I waited for this to pop up somewhere and I'm not a frequent forum-reader anywhere, i was just wondering why this was happening.
Hopefully Canon will think over its policy in handling third party equipment, because if there's the first grip from third party that supplies 'coverage' for this issue I will turn away from the original equipment completely.
josephandrews222 said:
I think the point is that nobody really can confirm that for sure.
I have 6 replacement batteries, where two of them were originals (coming with an EOS 60D and the EOS 5D III), two being original and two of them third party.
I also own a grip for both of them and just wanted to have the third party batteries on hand for the originals being empty unexpectedly.
First I had no issue with any of them.
After a certain upgrade-level of the firmware, as well at the EOS 60D as at the EOS 5D III I got the notification with three of them.
And you are counting right when you notice that at least one of the 'originals' is causing the notification. Both of the originals where bought at the same retailer (which is quite a big one) at the same time.
And I am getting the notification also for quite a few months. This did not start with the last firmware upgrade for me (Please: I'm talking about myself only.)
But with the grip, which are also original ones it's really annoying.
I waited for this to pop up somewhere and I'm not a frequent forum-reader anywhere, i was just wondering why this was happening.
Hopefully Canon will think over its policy in handling third party equipment, because if there's the first grip from third party that supplies 'coverage' for this issue I will turn away from the original equipment completely.
Upvote
0
Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
Never going to happen unless dgatwood's suggestion is taken up in large numbers which of course is never going to happen. You could always go back to the retailer and challenge them for selling counterfit goods, after all you have proof !
malmak said:
Never going to happen unless dgatwood's suggestion is taken up in large numbers which of course is never going to happen. You could always go back to the retailer and challenge them for selling counterfit goods, after all you have proof !
Upvote
0
Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
This brings up another wonderful consequence of this issue. The retailers are now stuck in the middle of all this and forced to deal with a new topic of complaints from customers who either want refunds, exchanges or think their equipment is faulty which will then require the retailers to deal with it however required.
So the moral to the story for retailers is to stop selling 3rd party batteries so they don't have to deal with the complaints. This means that not only will the genuine Canon batteries be in shorter supply and more expensive, you may not even have the 3rd party battery choice available in some places. And this also means more lost revenue for local camera shops if they choose to stock only genuine batteries and folks buy the batteries online afterward. Wonderful. I don't buy everything from my local store but I try to buy many things there to support them. I don't want them to go away!!
I don't see this thing being good for anyone in any way at all, including Canon. How unfortunate and sad.
zim said:
This brings up another wonderful consequence of this issue. The retailers are now stuck in the middle of all this and forced to deal with a new topic of complaints from customers who either want refunds, exchanges or think their equipment is faulty which will then require the retailers to deal with it however required.
So the moral to the story for retailers is to stop selling 3rd party batteries so they don't have to deal with the complaints. This means that not only will the genuine Canon batteries be in shorter supply and more expensive, you may not even have the 3rd party battery choice available in some places. And this also means more lost revenue for local camera shops if they choose to stock only genuine batteries and folks buy the batteries online afterward. Wonderful. I don't buy everything from my local store but I try to buy many things there to support them. I don't want them to go away!!
I don't see this thing being good for anyone in any way at all, including Canon. How unfortunate and sad.
Upvote
0
Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
Why would one spend a few thousand (insert currency here; mine was £3000.00 on 21 March 2012, the evening before it was supposed to be available - and you Americans were crying about it being $3000; we paid $4700 at the exchange rate then - sheesh!) on a 5D3, and then cheap out on batteries?! If you can afford the camera, you'd be silly to fit a crappy battery in it.
Why would one spend a few thousand (insert currency here; mine was £3000.00 on 21 March 2012, the evening before it was supposed to be available - and you Americans were crying about it being $3000; we paid $4700 at the exchange rate then - sheesh!) on a 5D3, and then cheap out on batteries?! If you can afford the camera, you'd be silly to fit a crappy battery in it.
Upvote
0
Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
Because I ordered two genuine Canon batteries from Amazon back in late November, and they won't actually reach me until early January (delivery date is while my employer is shut down for Christmas). Third-party batteries, many of which are likely made with the exact same brands of cells as the genuine article, are available for immediate delivery. If Canon can't deliver the goods, no one should be even slightly surprised when their customers turn to third-party suppliers.
Third-party batteries also come free with third-party battery grips (which cost hundreds of dollars less than the genuine Camera grips and are easier to find in stock), and even come with the camera if you buy it from B&H, so many people would have to throw away something that they got for free if they wanted to avoid third-party batteries. That borders on idiotic.
Finally, for those of us who carry around 6+ batteries, the cost difference can be hundreds of dollars. We're not talking about cutting corners to save $20 here. We're talking about buying third-party batteries to save the entire cost of a new midrange lens, and to be able to start shooting within the first two months of owning the camera. Unless Canon dramatically improves their availability and cost, IMO, you'd be silly not to use third-party batteries.
Fleetie said:
Because I ordered two genuine Canon batteries from Amazon back in late November, and they won't actually reach me until early January (delivery date is while my employer is shut down for Christmas). Third-party batteries, many of which are likely made with the exact same brands of cells as the genuine article, are available for immediate delivery. If Canon can't deliver the goods, no one should be even slightly surprised when their customers turn to third-party suppliers.
Third-party batteries also come free with third-party battery grips (which cost hundreds of dollars less than the genuine Camera grips and are easier to find in stock), and even come with the camera if you buy it from B&H, so many people would have to throw away something that they got for free if they wanted to avoid third-party batteries. That borders on idiotic.
Finally, for those of us who carry around 6+ batteries, the cost difference can be hundreds of dollars. We're not talking about cutting corners to save $20 here. We're talking about buying third-party batteries to save the entire cost of a new midrange lens, and to be able to start shooting within the first two months of owning the camera. Unless Canon dramatically improves their availability and cost, IMO, you'd be silly not to use third-party batteries.
Upvote
0
Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
Update on compatible Canon chargers with third party batteries.
I just purchased a used two year old Canon LC-E6 charger from a 6D kit. Model number is ZBAD... yes Z BAD! Works perfectly with all my third party batteries!
ZBAD - Came from a two year old 6D and will charge the old 2 year old Maximal and new Wasabi batteries with no problem.
My previously posted models...
ZFAD - Came with the 5D2 and will charge the old Maximal and new Wasabi batteries with no problem.
AJBC - Came with the 5D3 and will charge the new Wasabi batteries but not the old Maximal batteries.
Looks like if the model number starts off with "Z" there's a good chance the charger will work with third party batteries. But that's just based on only two samples. I'm finished buying chargers!
Update on compatible Canon chargers with third party batteries.
I just purchased a used two year old Canon LC-E6 charger from a 6D kit. Model number is ZBAD... yes Z BAD! Works perfectly with all my third party batteries!
ZBAD - Came from a two year old 6D and will charge the old 2 year old Maximal and new Wasabi batteries with no problem.
My previously posted models...
ZFAD - Came with the 5D2 and will charge the old Maximal and new Wasabi batteries with no problem.
AJBC - Came with the 5D3 and will charge the new Wasabi batteries but not the old Maximal batteries.
Looks like if the model number starts off with "Z" there's a good chance the charger will work with third party batteries. But that's just based on only two samples. I'm finished buying chargers!
Upvote
0
Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
For comparison purposes, my 6D charger is an AKBL, and has worked with all the third-party batteries I've tried so far, but then, they're all models that work with the 6D, so they're probably new enough to work with the updated 5Dmk3 firmware, too, so I guess that probably doesn't tell us much.
For comparison purposes, my 6D charger is an AKBL, and has worked with all the third-party batteries I've tried so far, but then, they're all models that work with the 6D, so they're probably new enough to work with the updated 5Dmk3 firmware, too, so I guess that probably doesn't tell us much.
Upvote
0
Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
I also hate what Canon did, but unfortunately I gave in and am ONLY using Canon batteries and chargers now.
Before the firmware update I had over 10 different third party batteries and even one of those dual chargers. They all worked fine without any problems. But after about a year I did notice some of the off brands were holding much smaller charges. When shooting stills it wasn't a huge issue, but I noticed when doing video shoots they were dying way sooner than they should. Not to mention that percentage status was way off. A couple of them went from 50% to dead in an instant. On a wedding shoot I was a 2nd video shooter and ALMOST missed the kiss at the altar when the battery suddenly died without any warning. I had just put in a fresh (or so I thought) battery at the start of the ceremony (and this was a shorter ceremony, about 15 minutes not hours long).
This happened a couple times before this case but this close call woke me up. I just had to pull the trigger and get the damned overpriced Canon batteries. I hate Canon for overcharging on this most basic accessory, but it's just not worth it getting screwed over trying to save a few bucks.
I also hate what Canon did, but unfortunately I gave in and am ONLY using Canon batteries and chargers now.
Before the firmware update I had over 10 different third party batteries and even one of those dual chargers. They all worked fine without any problems. But after about a year I did notice some of the off brands were holding much smaller charges. When shooting stills it wasn't a huge issue, but I noticed when doing video shoots they were dying way sooner than they should. Not to mention that percentage status was way off. A couple of them went from 50% to dead in an instant. On a wedding shoot I was a 2nd video shooter and ALMOST missed the kiss at the altar when the battery suddenly died without any warning. I had just put in a fresh (or so I thought) battery at the start of the ceremony (and this was a shorter ceremony, about 15 minutes not hours long).
This happened a couple times before this case but this close call woke me up. I just had to pull the trigger and get the damned overpriced Canon batteries. I hate Canon for overcharging on this most basic accessory, but it's just not worth it getting screwed over trying to save a few bucks.
Upvote
0
Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
If it would be a *few* bucks, but it isn't - I can buy a working chipped battery at 1/2-1/3 of Canon's price, and it will work in the current cameras. If Canon manages to disable them again some time from now, I can simply buy another updated 3rd party battery, unused and at 100% charge, and still save money.
youngjediboy said:
If it would be a *few* bucks, but it isn't - I can buy a working chipped battery at 1/2-1/3 of Canon's price, and it will work in the current cameras. If Canon manages to disable them again some time from now, I can simply buy another updated 3rd party battery, unused and at 100% charge, and still save money.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
Buying a chipped battery at 1/2-1/3 of Canon's price means you're saving $30-40. I know that 'every little bit counts' but saving somewhere between 1-4% of the cost of the camera is probably not worth the risk for most people. Granted, if you're buying 4+ batteries, it adds up. But if you're buying that many batteries, you probably need reliability.
Marsu42 said:
Buying a chipped battery at 1/2-1/3 of Canon's price means you're saving $30-40. I know that 'every little bit counts' but saving somewhere between 1-4% of the cost of the camera is probably not worth the risk for most people. Granted, if you're buying 4+ batteries, it adds up. But if you're buying that many batteries, you probably need reliability.
Upvote
0
Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
And just a day after I posted that, the second one of my cheap third-party batteries stopped communicating with the camera and won't charge with the Canon charger. So I've confirmed that if the chip doesn't work with the camera, the charger just rolls its eyes.
That's caused by a bad cell in the pack. Assuming that you buy from a reputable third-party manufacturer that sources cells from the same companies that Canon does, your odds of that happening should be the same as with a Canon battery. Of course, if the manufacturer buys junk batteries from a less-than-reputable manufacturer, you're screwed....
The bigger problem with some of the third-party batteries is that their electronics don't reliably reset when they are fully discharged, resulting in the chip becoming (at least temporarily) bricked, the camera refusing to communicate with the battery, and the battery becoming unchargeable except by third-party chargers. I've seen this happen with the generic (non-branded) batteries that came with my third-party grip. Thus far, I've had no troubles with the branded third-party battery that B&H shipped with my 6D (a Watson).
What it really comes down to is that if you buy third-party batteries, you should buy the ones that cost half what the Canon batteries cost, and not the ones that cost a tenth what the Canon batteries cost, because there's a price limit below which the adage "you get what you pay for" turns into "you don't even get what you paid for".
dgatwood said:
And just a day after I posted that, the second one of my cheap third-party batteries stopped communicating with the camera and won't charge with the Canon charger. So I've confirmed that if the chip doesn't work with the camera, the charger just rolls its eyes.
youngjediboy said:
That's caused by a bad cell in the pack. Assuming that you buy from a reputable third-party manufacturer that sources cells from the same companies that Canon does, your odds of that happening should be the same as with a Canon battery. Of course, if the manufacturer buys junk batteries from a less-than-reputable manufacturer, you're screwed....
The bigger problem with some of the third-party batteries is that their electronics don't reliably reset when they are fully discharged, resulting in the chip becoming (at least temporarily) bricked, the camera refusing to communicate with the battery, and the battery becoming unchargeable except by third-party chargers. I've seen this happen with the generic (non-branded) batteries that came with my third-party grip. Thus far, I've had no troubles with the branded third-party battery that B&H shipped with my 6D (a Watson).
What it really comes down to is that if you buy third-party batteries, you should buy the ones that cost half what the Canon batteries cost, and not the ones that cost a tenth what the Canon batteries cost, because there's a price limit below which the adage "you get what you pay for" turns into "you don't even get what you paid for".
Upvote
0
Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
Apart from me being Mr. Budget - what risk? Am I missing something here, or has the Canon fud finally sunk in? I'd evaluate the risk of a chipped (i.e. premium) 3rd party battery to turn into an explosive device just as with Canon, that's about zero. The one possibility I see is that it might have less charge or less load cycles, alas, it's cheaper.
neuroanatomist said:
Apart from me being Mr. Budget - what risk? Am I missing something here, or has the Canon fud finally sunk in? I'd evaluate the risk of a chipped (i.e. premium) 3rd party battery to turn into an explosive device just as with Canon, that's about zero. The one possibility I see is that it might have less charge or less load cycles, alas, it's cheaper.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
