Does the higher the mp goes also translate to needing a higher power source?

[slackercruster]

Is this a reason why the more of the early dslr's used AA batts? And as mp rose they would not run on 4 AA's?

Or is there another reason companies dropped AA batts in dslr's?

 

[Snaps]

Probably more likely the increase in fuctions, and computing functions for onboard image manipulation.

 

[jowensphoto]

I also expect that the camera makers realized they could make more money if the cameras were battery-specific.

 

[Markw]

While both of those are probably true, I really think it's because the cameras are simply more advanced, intricate, and involved. I mean, not only do they now have to do advanced noise reduction, video, writing 3+ full-res 12+MP files (originally somewhere around 1.3-6MP) per second, etc, etc. The cameras are simply far more advanced and have a TON more features and functions we take for granted. Plus, the batteries last tons longer than AAs.

Mark

 

[480sparky44 43]

That, and many OEM batteries are mini-computers themselves. With small chips & ICs in 'em, the chargers & cameras can communicate with them. That's why they have more than two terminals.

The battery can tell the charger when it's fully charged up, and the camera can monitor the battery's condition during shooting. I suspect the latter is a feature that was impossible, or inaccurate, using AA's. My D7000 can even tell me how old my batteries are, although I haven't quite reached their first 'birthday' so the camera still says they're 0 years old.

 

[iresq]

Even P&S cameras chew through batteries. My little A480 is terrible.

 

[Big Mike]

I don't think it's necessarily the higher MP count, but that may be part if it. Bigger image files require more computing power, which requires more juice.
For example, most DSLR cameras have (I think) one processor that handles all the functions of the camera. The latest, pro models have two or three processors...partially because of the larger images (more MP) but also to speed up the overall operation of the camera. But at the same time, I think I read somewhere that newer processors are also designed to use less power that older ones. So there would be some give and take on the power usage.

Another reason may be voltage. Their cameras may run better when they can use 7+ volts, which is easy with a lithium battery, but would require more AA cells. Also, longevity is better with lithium. I haven't really tested it, but I have battery grips that can use two lithium batteries or 6 AA cells. The AA batteries (I think) would only last for a fraction of the time (shots) that the lithium batteries would.

Also, it comes down to the spacial design of the cameras. (also true with many P&S cameras). They can design their lithium batteries with a wide range of shapes & sizes. My P&S Canon elph has one that looks almost like a CF card.

 

[analog.universe]

I really think it's more about the advances in battery technology than the advances in camera technology. I think in the 90s, if camera manufacturers could get a 2Ah battery that hardly weighs anything and can be recharged 1000 times, they would've. AA's were bad at running digicams, even when the cameras were simple, they practically died immediately.

 

[KmH]

Yep. The advance of lithium batteries.