cowbananas
Member
I use the AC160 and a Sony Z1 and both use similar looking batteries. I can pick up the genuine Sony batteries for around £40 (US$62) but the genuine Panasonic equivalent costs £185.($290).
How do Panasonic justify this outrageous cost while Sony can still make a profit charging what they do?
I've found Sony batteries are much, much better, last for years with no sign of deterioration, very affordable and you can depend that when the Sony battery reads 'five minutes remaining', that's EXACTLY what you have left in the tank. Not so with these, it's more like a gamble.
I've used third party batteries for the AC160 as well and though they have their faults, it makes economic sense to buy them as a back-up, especially when you nedd several.
This factor alone would make me seriously consider dropping Panasonic in future, even though I rate the AC160 as a very good camera. Does anyone have any ideas about rigging up something like the battery belts we used to use in the past that can run all day?
How do Panasonic justify this outrageous cost while Sony can still make a profit charging what they do?
I've found Sony batteries are much, much better, last for years with no sign of deterioration, very affordable and you can depend that when the Sony battery reads 'five minutes remaining', that's EXACTLY what you have left in the tank. Not so with these, it's more like a gamble.
I've used third party batteries for the AC160 as well and though they have their faults, it makes economic sense to buy them as a back-up, especially when you nedd several.
This factor alone would make me seriously consider dropping Panasonic in future, even though I rate the AC160 as a very good camera. Does anyone have any ideas about rigging up something like the battery belts we used to use in the past that can run all day?