Time to whinge about USB type C, PD and devices

[Richard B99]

OK with the launch of the Sony A6700 you now don’t get any way to charge your neat camera but have to revert to box diving to find the right wire and charger. This is beginning to really annoy me. But not in the way you might think. I have lots of cables and chargers including C and PD typed (not to mention now obsolete type A and Mini ones). I have a good sized ‘cables box’ which I try to hold them all in. Unfortunately, they tend to escape when I (or family) are in a hurry.

The issue is what & charger do I need for a particular device? So, USB C standard covers just the Socket & Plug dimensions. PD covers the power negotiations between socket and plug (and device). Right now, I have no indication as to whether I have used the right cable even if its a type C. I have a pile of genetic white ‘apple like’ cables. What’s to tell me if it is a high speed data cable (type 3, 3.1 or 3.2 or even lightning) or slow (type 2). Yeah most ‘charging’ cables are USB type 2 data. Or vice versa where data rates are dog slow. Try finding fast charging and fast data cables (clue, the wire may be a little thicker). Try remembering a month or two later when box diving. Or when trying to identify which cable to use into which socket (eg. Z8).

So we are faced with getting another device (USB meter) to diagnose apparently malfunctioning connected gear! Duh?

And… what happens if you connect your camera to a dodgy (fake) cable or charger. I bet Sony has small print in its terms and conditions. ‘Not responsible for’.

I am all for trying to reduce the charger mountain but this approach doesn’t really solve a clear issue (most folk, simply do not even recognise this as an issue). Id suggest as a start, better coding on cable ends (i.e not tiny low contrast text) and ,in device, display of amperage, voltage and data rates available to the device through the end to end connection.

Ok, this is firmly in the first world problem domain. But if legislators want one cable to rule them all, we need a better solution than this impending mess.



Thoughts?

 

[GeoffRG]

I have to agree that the standardisation isn't what the EU intended when they mandated a common connector for device charging. Apple have already reverted to MagSafe for the MacBook series because it is what owners want. All be it the PSU is a USB C type.

Simply there are too many variants on the USB cable, high speed data, power only (with differing power ratings) and, I think, some data only cables. The problem is that they all look exactly the same. The idea of reducing the number of chargers needed for the range of devices is basically well intentioned but in practice it will take many years to achieve and won't actually solve the problem because of the different cables that are available. A high speed charger connected to a fast charging device using a low power cable is a low speed system. At least with the various previous USB cables you couldn't make that mistake.

As you may gather, I'm far from convinced that the end result is what was intended.

 

[Bob A L]

I really understand your concern, but personally, I take this another step in another direction. That is the battery situation itself. I have never bothered to try and categorize them all, but am willing to bet that there are less than a dozen or two at most different batteries (cells) in use across all brands and models of cameras. These batteries are housed in differently shaped plastic cases to slide into our cameras. Without these cases, the batteries used are smaller, and lighter and when wired to some standard plug/connector system could just as well be standard across many brands and models.

I fly electric model airplanes, and the batteries are standard cell packs with a lead wire and a plug in connector. And I use 5 or 6 different battery brands, and in a dozen or more different brands of planes. They all just plug in the corresponding plugs. I also have a cordless phone in my home with 4 handsets, and have had two previous brands before the ones I have now, all of which use a standard wrapped set of lithium cells and a wire lead with a standard connector.

Had the camera manufacturers adapted such years ago, we would only need one charger, and whatever appropriate plug in connector for charging. As it is, I have cameras that are the same brand, and almost identical models outside of one being newer than the other that require different batteries and chargers, just because the plastic battery case is very slightly different between them with same batteries inside the case.

Rant over - thanks for the opportunity to vent.

 

[Thom Hogan]

I have to agree that the standardisation isn't what the EU intended when they mandated a common connector for device charging.

Actually, that's exactly what the EU intended. As many of us pointed out when the first proposal came out, it would have unintended consequences. The Sony omission is just one of those.

Apple have already reverted to MagSafe for the MacBook series because it is what owners want. All be it the PSU is a USB C type.

Another argument about the EU rules was that it would tend to stifle innovation. So, Apple can do whatever they want at their end (MagSafe), but they can't at the other end. One question I'd have is whether or not an idea like MagSafe is better at the device or the AC source end ;~).

Simply there are too many variants on the USB cable, high speed data, power only (with differing power ratings) and, I think, some data only cables.

This, too, was a foreseen implication of the EU rules. Expect them to eventually figuring out that they need to require cables to be marked ;~).

Get ready for more EU attempts at "controlling" tech. The next big proposed standard has to do with user removable batteries being required. But there are some other smaller ones that will have negative impacts, as well.

The EU's original complaint was about how much of the power/cable tech was going to landfill. I'm pretty sure that hasn't really changed with the regulations. The correct answer was better and ubiquitous recycling. Of course, as we're finding out with recycling, if the supply of recycled items > demand for recycled materials...

 

[Thom Hogan]

I have never bothered to try and categorize them all, but am willing to bet that there are less than a dozen or two at most different batteries (cells) in use across all brands and models of cameras. These batteries are housed in differently shaped plastic cases to slide into our cameras.

I'd be willing to venture that in the camera biz, only two internal cell types are really used, maybe three.

Without these cases,

No, the humped cases (e.g. Nikon EN-EL15) actually wrap around the two individual battery cells used inside. I'm not sure you could make the battery smaller/lighter.

Had the camera manufacturers adapted such years ago, we would only need one charger, and whatever appropriate plug in connector for charging.

Also not convinced of this. And I believe the camera makers would say that having to live with one power provision that would have been decided 20+ years ago would have lowered innovation.

 

[GeoffRG]

I have to agree that the standardisation isn't what the EU intended when they mandated a common connector for device charging.

Actually, that's exactly what the EU intended. As many of us pointed out when the first proposal came out, it would have unintended consequences. The Sony omission is just one of those.

That is what comes of being lazy and using an iPad rather than a computer. What I should have said was "the standardisation we have achieved isn't what the EU intended". The use of a standard connector is all very well but that doesn't mean that the user needs only one charger for several different devices. The EU intended that the charger shouldn't be delivered with the device. As an example the charger designed for an iPhone won't work terribly well with a MacBook Pro but the MacBook charger is fine for the phone too, unfortunately it can only be in one place so I still end up with two chargers.

Apple have already reverted to MagSafe for the MacBook series because it is what owners want. All be it the PSU is a USB C type.

Another argument about the EU rules was that it would tend to stifle innovation. So, Apple can do whatever they want at their end (MagSafe), but they can't at the other end. One question I'd have is whether or not an idea like MagSafe is better at the device or the AC source end ;~).

Device end, if someone walks past my seat when I am flying I don't want the cable to get wrapped around his/her leg and pull my computer to the floor. I have had a couple of instances where someone has caught the cable and it has simply broken away from the computer. Yes, it is my responsibility to prevent a trip hazard but if I get it wrong both parties are protected. Ideally it would be both ends. Being able to replace only the cable, as with the latest MacBooks, is my preference.

Simply there are too many variants on the USB cable, high speed data, power only (with differing power ratings) and, I think, some data only cables.

This, too, was a foreseen implication of the EU rules. Expect them to eventually figuring out that they need to require cables to be marked ;~).

Doesn't solve the problem of the huge number of existing cables.

Get ready for more EU attempts at "controlling" tech. The next big proposed standard has to do with user removable batteries being required. But there are some other smaller ones that will have negative impacts, as well.

The EU's original complaint was about how much of the power/cable tech was going to landfill. I'm pretty sure that hasn't really changed with the regulations. The correct answer was better and ubiquitous recycling. Of course, as we're finding out with recycling, if the supply of recycled items > demand for recycled materials...

If you expect the EU to do the sensible thing...

I dislike their attempts to manipulate the rest of the world, the EU isn't the only place where people have good ideas.

 

[Bob A L]

I'm sure the camera mfg's would find dozens of reasons why they could not do this. But mainly because they couldn't sell you new batteries for succeeding models. I will admit that Nikon is among the better brands for not changing batteries on a yearly basis.

I remember having 3 different brand x point and shoot models some years ago that all had different batteries and chargers.

My main point being that I have over 30 different RC models of completely different configurations and ages and brands that all use any of numerous brands of generic li-po cells and a single charger without issue. And that charger is way more sophisticated than the typical charger for cameras.

 

[GeoffRG]

I have never bothered to try and categorize them all, but am willing to bet that there are less than a dozen or two at most different batteries (cells) in use across all brands and models of cameras. These batteries are housed in differently shaped plastic cases to slide into our cameras.

I'd be willing to venture that in the camera biz, only two internal cell types are really used, maybe three.

Without these cases,

No, the humped cases (e.g. Nikon EN-EL15) actually wrap around the two individual battery cells used inside. I'm not sure you could make the battery smaller/lighter.

Had the camera manufacturers adapted such years ago, we would only need one charger, and whatever appropriate plug in connector for charging.

Also not convinced of this. And I believe the camera makers would say that having to live with one power provision that would have been decided 20+ years ago would have lowered innovation.

I agree with a lot of that, though I suspect three cell types might be on the low side. As far as I can see there are only three configurations; single cell, 3.7V, twin cell, 7.4V and three cell, 11.1V (interestingly sold as 10.8 V). Without dismantling individual batteries it is difficult to determine whether they use the same type of cell but it is very likely.

I do know that an adaptor plate exists to allow a Canon LP-E4 and LP-E4N to be charged with a Nikon MH-26A charger, for the EN-EL18. A separate plate allows the EN-EL4 to be charged. This rather implies that the Canon and Nikon batteries have much in common.

 

[Thom Hogan]

I will admit that Nikon is among the better brands for not changing batteries on a yearly basis.

All the main brands understand the benefit of staying with a battery. Canon, Fujifilm, Nikon, and Sony all do it for a large number of their products. However, the internal electronics do have differing power needs. You don't want to be building converter/inverter mechanisms into a body because you need a different amp/Wattage. Nikon at the moment has standardized on three sizes (the rest have all gone the way of obsolescence it seems). Sony has four primary ones that I know of. Lost track of Canon. Fujifilm is what now, two?

I remember having 3 different brand x point and shoot models some years ago that all had different batteries and chargers.

One would have thought it that batteries would have been one of the things that CIPA tried to standardize. They may yet do it, as there are benefits to all players in doing so. However, I don't think they could have done it early in the century.

 

[jxh]

OK with the launch of the Sony A6700 you now don’t get any way to charge your neat camera but have to revert to box diving to find the right wire and charger. This is beginning to really annoy me. But not in the way you might think. I have lots of cables and chargers including C and PD typed (not to mention now obsolete type A and Mini ones). I have a good sized ‘cables box’ which I try to hold them all in. Unfortunately, they tend to escape when I (or family) are in a hurry.

The issue is what & charger do I need for a particular device? So, USB C standard covers just the Socket & Plug dimensions. PD covers the power negotiations between socket and plug (and device). Right now, I have no indication as to whether I have used the right cable even if its a type C. I have a pile of genetic white ‘apple like’ cables. What’s to tell me if it is a high speed data cable (type 3, 3.1 or 3.2 or even lightning) or slow (type 2). Yeah most ‘charging’ cables are USB type 2 data. Or vice versa where data rates are dog slow. Try finding fast charging and fast data cables (clue, the wire may be a little thicker). Try remembering a month or two later when box diving. Or when trying to identify which cable to use into which socket (eg. Z8).

So we are faced with getting another device (USB meter) to diagnose apparently malfunctioning connected gear! Duh?

And… what happens if you connect your camera to a dodgy (fake) cable or charger. I bet Sony has small print in its terms and conditions. ‘Not responsible for’.

I am all for trying to reduce the charger mountain but this approach doesn’t really solve a clear issue (most folk, simply do not even recognise this as an issue). Id suggest as a start, better coding on cable ends (i.e not tiny low contrast text) and ,in device, display of amperage, voltage and data rates available to the device through the end to end connection.

Ok, this is firmly in the first world problem domain. But if legislators want one cable to rule them all, we need a better solution than this impending mess.

Thoughts?

 

[Mackiesback]

Standardization can be good. Our fuel cars have standardized fuel fillers, EVs are now all adopting the Tesla connectors, =motorcycles all have controls in the same place so riders new to the brand don't injure themselves etc. But with standardization you limit manufacturers from building a batter mousetrap. That's the downside.

If I am spending $1400 for a 2023 model of camera, I expect a cable, regardless of standards. Even Apple gives a cable, and they are the stingiest of electronics manufacturers. This is a poor optic for Sony.

 

[Sucked Dry]

The other problem is that the USB-C connector is flimsy and unrepairable.

I just replaced a computer that charged only through the USB-C ports. They were both thoroughly worn out, and were unusable for either data or charging. And they are soldered directly to the motherboard with exceedingly tiny, inaccessible solder joints, so when the charging port wears out, you throw away the computer.

 

[Bob A L]

Agree completely on it being the weakest of connectors

 

[Carey Brown]

I too have a big box of cables that you can't tell their specs by looking at the connectors.

Give me a cheap cable tester !!!

 

[Carey Brown]

I'd like to see a standard part number code for cables that would tell you everything about the cable and connector's specs. The manufacturer could add their own designation after that, but anyone picking up the cable would know how it can be used.

 

[a_c_skinner]

I've got two USB cameras (one micro usb, one type c), a USB C laptop and the rest of my stuff is Lightening. I've never graduated beyond using whatever charger I have at hand plus one of three leads from Amazon. Is it that important to distinguish beyond this? Beyond some chargers being faster it seems to work.

--
Andrew Skinner

 

[Chris Noble]

USB-C, PD and Thunderbolt 3 are absolutely brilliant.

A long, messy path to get here. That's often the case with quickly-advancing technology.

And for my two cameras, I like to have a spare battery with me, so I use the wall charger to top them up when I get home. Very simple.

 

[Mika Y.]

I haven't used USB to transfer data to a computer or smartphone for years (just a card reader of WiFi), so I can't comment on that side of things.

As for charging, the few times I've plugged my R7 into one of my USB chargers or a powerbank on the go, it seems to just have charged without problems. I haven't tried any of the truly ancient USB chargers though, just the one I got with my current phone in 2020 and the previous phone's charger (from somewhere around 2017 I guess).

Mostly I just use the dedicated battery charger though, since I'm then free to use the camera with an another battery meanwhile. But obviously having the option for using in-body charging available is good.

 

[GeoffRG]

I too have a big box of cables that you can't tell their specs by looking at the connectors.

Give me a cheap cable tester !!!

I fear it is a little late for putting the specifications on cables, there are too many around but, it could, and should, be applied to the next iteration of the USB standard.

With 24 conductors in a full USB C cable, a cheap tester isn’t likely. You need to generate representative signals for a comprehensive test.

 

[GeoffRG]

I haven't used USB to transfer data to a computer or smartphone for years (just a card reader of WiFi), so I can't comment on that side of things.

How do you connect your card reader? I know some computers have SD card readers but any other type of card will require a reader connected to a USB port.

As for charging, the few times I've plugged my R7 into one of my USB chargers or a powerbank on the go, it seems to just have charged without problems. I haven't tried any of the truly ancient USB chargers though, just the one I got with my current phone in 2020 and the previous phone's charger (from somewhere around 2017 I guess).

A USB C charger will charge the battery but a phone charger won’t charge it very quickly. A more powerful charger will charge faster but an underrated cable might overheat.

Mostly I just use the dedicated battery charger though, since I'm then free to use the camera with an another battery meanwhile. But obviously having the option for using in-body charging available is good.

I’m not keen on charging a battery in the camera, I’ve had batteries swell during charging and I wouldn’t want one stuck in a camera. Your choice, obviously.