330 HS ?

Marty Too wrote:

Marty Too wrote:

stevenic wrote:

brianj wrote:

Marty Too wrote:

One reason that the camera might be sent back to Canon has to do with the charge battery message. Some have posted that the solution is the slightly bigger battery.

Could someone please post the model of that improved battery for me. I need to try that and hope it will cure my charge battery message problem.

The improved battery is the NB-6LH to replace the NB-6L, but that is used in other cameras such as the S120.

The known battery fault with the ELPH330 is mentioned by canon on this website: http://support-sg.canon-asia.com/index.jsp?fuseaction=support&prod_type=notices-digitalcameras-ixus255

It has been discussed in the following threads:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53473372

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53451130

Stevenic has had his fixed and knows more about it than me.

Brian

Yes sometime there was charge sometime not it was a connection issue to the battery. The same link Brian provided, mine had the No 1 in the sixth digit so sent it and they repaired it fine since. It was all covered by warranty.

Cheers

Steve.

I apologize for cross posting this in three threads but I am doing so because some follow these threads by email notification and I think this solution is brilliantly simple. It was not my idea but I want to spread the joy that is a beautiful WORKING 330 HS!

I just bought 2 Halcyon batteries from Amazon for $12. My Canon battery reads 4.1 volts and gives the dreaded "Charge the battery" message. The 2 Halcyon batteries were just delivered this afternoon by UPS. Without charging them they read 3.9 volts and fired the camera up just fine.

My wife and compared the batteries. We both think the problem with the Canon battery is that the electrical contacts are recessed further into the body (away from the edge) of the battery.

How silly Canon has been with this problem. One poster claims that Canon added thickness to the door side of the battery to "solve" the problem by pushing it further toward the contacts is the camera. This is just wrong. It's much safer to buy the aftermarket batteries. Who wants extra pressure on the battery door

We have a few cameras that work fine once their battery doors are taped into place because the plastic on the door latch region has failed. No one needs to ruin their 330 HS this way.

Thanks for this excellent feedback. It interests me because I have an old NB-4L which I found on the road, and its been knocked around a lot because I sanded it down and added some thickness to one side to make it into a NB-5L that I needed for my SX260, but when that camera failed I had to turn this battery back into a NB-4L, and found that it produced the dreaded error at first until I carefully adjusted the added side thickness so the battery was perfectly positioned, now it is ok.

So I also think it is a battery problem, maybe you can compare the location of the three recesses carefully to see if it matched the halcyons.

Brian

I compared a second time and I stand by my first statement. The Canon recesses are too deep.

That's probably the real problem with the faulty batch, I was introducing another problem that was isolated to just mine.  Of course another solution for your deep recess problem would be to lift the gold contacts in the camera up a little bit higher.

This is at least the second recent botched fix for canon, the first was the battery debacle with the SX270/SX280 model that also required a replacement NB-5LH high capacity battery.  Of course they wouldn't supply that either, preferring to leave their faithful customers high and dry, and in the case you have, they are reluctant again because to supply another battery would cost them money, even though the battery would be worth about $1 to canon but you have to pay at least $60.

These companies are really becoming dodgy.

Brian