Why no DSLR cameras have usb charge?

[Mark B.]

With completion of the USB power delivery spec, which allows up to 100w of power, why are no other cameras other than point and shoot using USB to charge? Even some laptops now have usb charge.

USB charge or not, I don't take my laptop out to the beach or other areas where there is no source of electric. If I were that remote from an outlet, I'd be sure to have an extra laptop battery with me.

But the moment you ARE next to an outlet, you can hook up and start using your laptop immediately, even if you happened to exhaust both batteries on said beach.

But with cameras it seems were are forced to use proprietary connectors.

Are there no DSLR cameras on the horizon that can be charged via usb?

If my camera is a charger, I cannot take it more than a few feet away from an outlet to use it. Pretty useless. I have multiple batteries, and a couple chargers so I can charge the batteries independent of the camera.

Mark

My Canon XA20 camcorder has an AC port, and will charge the battery if connected. I do have a two-hour battery, and a four-hour extended battery, so I can definitely take it 'a few feet away from an outlet' . But if shooting next to a power source, I can connect and not worry about running the batteries down.

<shrug> I've never run out of battery power, so the ability to use the camera while plugged in is of no concern to me.

 

[Mike_PEAT]

Personally I have never come across this. I suppose there is always scope for anything to be faulty, including batteries exploding in the device. But I think it is rare.

As least for Macbooks, it happened to two at work and my own personal unit. Had it happen to AAs, and a drill battery.

 

[Manbungo Skumbaum Chimwala]

They're dinosaurs peddling proprietary interfaces in a desperate bid to grab as many pennies as possible.

For example, Nikon requires one to spend hundreds on a power adapter and a dummy battery that sits in the battery compartment, just to power a camera using A/C.

Compare that to phones that can be powered on the go using:

1. their own internal batteries,
2. cases with built-in batteries, like Morphie Juice packs
3. external batteries via USB (e.g., Anker)
4. swappable internal batteries.
5. USB power from (1) USB power adapter, (2) another phone, and (3) a computer's USB port

Ever noticed that mobile phone batteries are around 3.7v and DSLR ones are around 7.2 v ?

Maybe it has something to do with that.

One can count on those ossified fossils to offer a non-standard voltage, at a time when there are a plethora of 5V, 9V, 12V, 19V, and 20V chargers that can even charge laptops.

And speaking of laptops, do you know how easy it is to charge a laptop? Not just via the host of power banks above or even solar power, but using the wonderfully simple AC adapter that comes with the device.

By contrast, the $3000 D8xx Nikon bodies don't even include one.

For shame!

Ideally you could charge off the USB & external battery charger both. Nikon certainly includes a battery and charger with the D810. The good news is that battery lasts well over 1000 shots in virtually every situation and the battery charges back to full in about 2 - 3 hours on the dedicated charger. Compare that to the Sony's USB charging where they do not always include a charger besides the USB, most models only give you one battery, and recharging takes twice as long via USB.

So let's compare out of the box experiences:

Camera + $50 extra battery (Nikon)

- 2000+ shots, MINIMUM

- 4 - 6 Hours to charge both, and you can still be off using the camera while the other battery is charging.

Camera + $55 extra battery (Sony)

- 1000 shots, probably

- 10 - 15 hours to charge both, with the camera being unavailable (glued to the wall at least) while charging

Sure you can buy an external charger for the Sony, but now you're spending more to solve a problem you didn't have with the Nikon. Out of the box, the experience is simply better. Sony needs USB charging because it significantly helps the product experience when using only one battery. Nikon generally wouldn't gain much in comparison.

Remember too that standby doesn't really use power on a DSLR. It's not unreasonable for ONE battery to last an entire vacation. It's also very easy to predict when you'll need your next battery, because you maybe be sitting at 1200 shots since last charge and still have 35% of battery left.

Good points, Brian. I agree with your perspective. DSLRs, especially high-end Nikons, have great battery life. No doubt about that. Although I do wonder how they would handle wifi/gps.

 

[briantii]

They're dinosaurs peddling proprietary interfaces in a desperate bid to grab as many pennies as possible.

For example, Nikon requires one to spend hundreds on a power adapter and a dummy battery that sits in the battery compartment, just to power a camera using A/C.

Compare that to phones that can be powered on the go using:

1. their own internal batteries,
2. cases with built-in batteries, like Morphie Juice packs
3. external batteries via USB (e.g., Anker)
4. swappable internal batteries.
5. USB power from (1) USB power adapter, (2) another phone, and (3) a computer's USB port

Ever noticed that mobile phone batteries are around 3.7v and DSLR ones are around 7.2 v ?

Maybe it has something to do with that.

One can count on those ossified fossils to offer a non-standard voltage, at a time when there are a plethora of 5V, 9V, 12V, 19V, and 20V chargers that can even charge laptops.

And speaking of laptops, do you know how easy it is to charge a laptop? Not just via the host of power banks above or even solar power, but using the wonderfully simple AC adapter that comes with the device.

By contrast, the $3000 D8xx Nikon bodies don't even include one.

For shame!

Ideally you could charge off the USB & external battery charger both. Nikon certainly includes a battery and charger with the D810. The good news is that battery lasts well over 1000 shots in virtually every situation and the battery charges back to full in about 2 - 3 hours on the dedicated charger. Compare that to the Sony's USB charging where they do not always include a charger besides the USB, most models only give you one battery, and recharging takes twice as long via USB.

So let's compare out of the box experiences:

Camera + $50 extra battery (Nikon)

- 2000+ shots, MINIMUM

- 4 - 6 Hours to charge both, and you can still be off using the camera while the other battery is charging.

Camera + $55 extra battery (Sony)

- 1000 shots, probably

- 10 - 15 hours to charge both, with the camera being unavailable (glued to the wall at least) while charging

Sure you can buy an external charger for the Sony, but now you're spending more to solve a problem you didn't have with the Nikon. Out of the box, the experience is simply better. Sony needs USB charging because it significantly helps the product experience when using only one battery. Nikon generally wouldn't gain much in comparison.

Remember too that standby doesn't really use power on a DSLR. It's not unreasonable for ONE battery to last an entire vacation. It's also very easy to predict when you'll need your next battery, because you maybe be sitting at 1200 shots since last charge and still have 35% of battery left.

Good points, Brian. I agree with your perspective. DSLRs, especially high-end Nikons, have great battery life. No doubt about that. Although I do wonder how they would handle wifi/gps.

Wifi (never bothered with GPS)... generally hurts a good bit... but then again doesn't usually don't work well enough to warrant leaving on for any length of time either. ;-)

I've used the wifi on mine a handful of times... it's good for a remote shutter release when taking family portrait "selfies", and sometimes if you "just have to" share a photo with someone else while you're out... but again very rarely for me.

 

[Max Iso]

Good points, Brian. I agree with your perspective. DSLRs, especially high-end Nikons, have great battery life. No doubt about that. Although I do wonder how they would handle wifi/gps.

Wifi (never bothered with GPS)... generally hurts a good bit... but then again doesn't usually don't work well enough to warrant leaving on for any length of time either. ;-)

I've used the wifi on mine a handful of times... it's good for a remote shutter release when taking family portrait "selfies", and sometimes if you "just have to" share a photo with someone else while you're out... but again very rarely for me.

This seems to be what so many of these guys don't consider. People who love to shoot with phones also are likely to bypass PP. Well i shoot raw only for a reason, which means instant upload is pointless. Every modern ILC offers raws and while many people will shoot then with jpegs, i don't think it's the overwhelming majority that would justify the extra cost of phone-like connection.

This is why ILC are generally lagging behind in that dept.

 

[riveredger]

Personally I have never come across this. I suppose there is always scope for anything to be faulty, including batteries exploding in the device. But I think it is rare.

As least for Macbooks, it happened to two at work and my own personal unit. Had it happen to AAs, and a drill battery.

Odd. That is not normal.

 

[tko]

What possible purpose would it serve to use a $3000 camera as a charger? These aren't toys to be used like a cell phone. Doesn't matter if you just happen to have a high power USB power source (which aren't common), the charging circuitry must still be inside the camera. Use them as they are meant to be used-it works far better.

 

[riveredger]

What possible purpose would it serve to use a $3000 camera as a charger? These aren't toys to be used like a cell phone. Doesn't matter if you just happen to have a high power USB power source (which aren't common), the charging circuitry must still be inside the camera. Use them as they are meant to be used-it works far better.

 

[Manbungo Skumbaum Chimwala]

What possible purpose would it serve to use a $3000 camera as a charger? These aren't toys to be used like a cell phone. Doesn't matter if you just happen to have a high power USB power source (which aren't common), the charging circuitry must still be inside the camera. Use them as they are meant to be used-it works far better.

 

[Mark B.]

With completion of the USB power delivery spec, which allows up to 100w of power, why are no other cameras other than point and shoot using USB to charge? Even some laptops now have usb charge. But with cameras it seems were are forced to use proprietary connectors.

Are there no DSLR cameras on the horizon that can be charged via usb?

Probably bc most DSLRs have far better battery life than their ML counterparts. The new D500 is rated at 1240 shots, that's 2.5 grand if it's gripped. Keep the extra AA grip tray handy and you get another thousand or so with a quick tray swap full of Eneloops.

I've always had a grip for all of my DSLRs, but not once used the AA tray. A set of NiMH batteries for the grip takes up more space and weighs more than a single Li-ion battery.

 

[tommydog35]

You might as well say what purpose does it serve to have a $2000 laptop charge from USB. Is that also a toy?

As for charging batteries in the camera, I don't see the problem. I always have a few spare and it really would not take that long. Plus most people don't use their camera 24 hours a day. They actually go to bed an sleep!

Besides it's not an all or nothing situation. You could also have external chargers that are usb. Also usb power in mains sockets is becoming more popular - I have them in my house.

 

[FrancoD]

BTW :

"Even some laptops now have usb charge."

Yes there are laptops with USB charge but only via USB C and some of those need a dedicated USB C charger so those chargers are not fully compatible.

 

[Max Iso]

With completion of the USB power delivery spec, which allows up to 100w of power, why are no other cameras other than point and shoot using USB to charge? Even some laptops now have usb charge. But with cameras it seems were are forced to use proprietary connectors.

Are there no DSLR cameras on the horizon that can be charged via usb?

Probably bc most DSLRs have far better battery life than their ML counterparts. The new D500 is rated at 1240 shots, that's 2.5 grand if it's gripped. Keep the extra AA grip tray handy and you get another thousand or so with a quick tray swap full of Eneloops.

I've always had a grip for all of my DSLRs, but not once used the AA tray. A set of NiMH batteries for the grip takes up more space and weighs more than a single Li-ion battery.

This is true but i have never been worried about weight or size (or i wouldn't be using a gripped D300). I like having them at the ready just in case. I also have about a dozen extra Eneloops at the ready (in a nice little pouch in my camera bag) which gives me like 4,000+ shots at any given moment on hand.

 

[robgendreau]

There are actually quite a few of us that would like USB charging and power in camera. It won't affect others. I have GPS units, eg, that have both swappable batteries and USB charging.

Some of us do studio stuff, or time exposures, or other work where you have to undo the rig to change batteries and it's a PITA. Some manufacturers sell DC connectors, usually 12v, so sometimes the feature is present, although you might have to get a cable or battery adapter. They obviously step down voltage for power. What we want is a boost converter instead to raise the voltage up to 7.4 or whatever is usually used to power the cameras from 5/USB. And charging circuitry. So you could use USB (even somewhat older cheap USB battery packs, solar packs, etc exist that do 2.1A, more than enough to charge).

Lots of action cams do this (many seem to use 3.7v though).

But camera manufacturers get the sheeple to pay $$$ for batteries that are made for far far less money, so I expect the big reason is profit.

 

[Mark B.]

There are actually quite a few of us that would like USB charging and power in camera. It won't affect others. I have GPS units, eg, that have both swappable batteries and USB charging.

Some of us do studio stuff, or time exposures, or other work where you have to undo the rig to change batteries and it's a PITA. Some manufacturers sell DC connectors, usually 12v, so sometimes the feature is present, although you might have to get a cable or battery adapter. They obviously step down voltage for power. What we want is a boost converter instead to raise the voltage up to 7.4 or whatever is usually used to power the cameras from 5/USB. And charging circuitry. So you could use USB (even somewhat older cheap USB battery packs, solar packs, etc exist that do 2.1A, more than enough to charge).

Lots of action cams do this (many seem to use 3.7v though).

But camera manufacturers get the sheeple to pay $$$ for batteries that are made for far far less money, so I expect the big reason is profit.

...or do like some of us and buy reliable 3rd party batteries for less than half the price of the OEM battery. I haven't paid for an extra OEM battery since my first DSLR back in '2000.

 

[Midwest]

With completion of the USB power delivery spec, which allows up to 100w of power, why are no other cameras other than point and shoot using USB to charge? Even some laptops now have usb charge. But with cameras it seems were are forced to use proprietary connectors.

Are there no DSLR cameras on the horizon that can be charged via usb?

Probably bc most DSLRs have far better battery life than their ML counterparts.

Maybe DSLR makers would rather not subject their cameras to the chance of a charging battery getting hot, swelling, leaking or worse, and damaging the camera.

Let the most risky part of the battery cycle take place in a throwaway charger and not inside an expensive camera.

If this truly becomes a desirable thing then Canikon will add it. For now it's just a straw man argument.

 

[Slaginfected]

With completion of the USB power delivery spec, which allows up to 100w of power, why are no other cameras other than point and shoot using USB to charge? Even some laptops now have usb charge. But with cameras it seems were are forced to use proprietary connectors.

Are there no DSLR cameras on the horizon that can be charged via usb?

It ties up your camera for hours, whereas you can change a battery in seconds.

 

[The Ghost of Caravaggio]

[No message]

 

[Bob A L]

Why wouold anyone want to have their expensive camera laying around tied to their computer with a usb cable to charge the battery. Any dslr I ever had was furnished with a separate battery charger that you can just put the battery in and have your camera in a nice safe place or be easily ready for use with your other battery while the exhausted battery is charging.

And at thousands of shots before charge required or months of storage without depletion, very little reason to worry much about charging batteries. I imagine a lot of folks that have only had cameras with evf or rear lcd's only find it hard to believe how long the batteries in the typical dslr last before requiring recharging. I know I was the other way around when I started using cameras with only evf and found out how often they need fresh batteries.

 

[Alphoid]

And dSLR customers too, for the most part, although not universally. Pentax has the most innovative dSLRs, now that Sony left that business, and they're struggling. Nikon has growing market share, and while they do very solid engineering, they've never done anything innovative, ever.

For the most part, photographers are an extremely conservative bunch.

For the most part, Canon/Nikon cater only to traditional photographers. A wedding photographer might go through several batteries on a shoot. Fast external chargers make complete sense.

For home users, leaving a camera plugged in most of the time on any generic USB charger makes the most sense. Coincidentally, lack of USB charging is one of my three frustrations with the LX100. For travel, I usually leave all my equipment charging in the hotel room overnight. The LX100 means I need to carry an extra charger with me. dSLRs, it'd be doubly nice, since they have super-long batter life. Even an occasional short top-up would do it for travel.

It's decisions like this why I recommend Canon/Nikon mostly to pros, and steer amateurs towards brands catering to other modes of use as well.