• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / a9 / Sony a9 Q&D battery draw numbers

Sony a9 Q&D battery draw numbers

June 7, 2017 JimK 4 Comments

This is the 18th in a series of posts on the Sony a9. The series starts here.

I did a camera heating test for the a9 with what I thought was a fairly heavy usage scenario and reported the results here. The rise over ambient looked like it was going to get to about 17 or 18 degrees C above ambient. The time constant was about half an hour. The big question was: how close to worst-case was my test?

I set up the test fixture that I described here. It didn’t work. That darned 26 gauge blue wire had come loose. I got out the soldering iron and soldered on an extension, then soldered that to the other blue wire. I set up an ammeter:

On the scale I’m using, the ammeter as a resistance of 0.1 ohm, which should be low enough not to affect the measurements materially. I made a series of measurements with the camera in various modes:

The scenario I tested is in highlighted green. The worst one I found is shaded in red. It’s a bit higher, so maybe the worst case rise is more like 20 or 22 degrees C. 

There are significant caveats:

  • The current bounces around a lot. I turned on averaging on the meter, but didn’t spend much time trying to figure out what the right number of readings to average was. I was almost certainly low. 
  • I didn’t test IBIS or AF. In the past testing with the a7RII, Those have not been contributors to battery draw ion and of themselves, although the scanning of the sensor for Af has caused considerable draw.
  • There has been speculation that the SD card used affects draw. I used a 256 GB Lexar Professional 1000x 159 MB/s card in Slot 1.
  • The mechanical shutter could draw more current than the ES. OTOH, it doesn’t go to 5 fps.

There’s going to be lots more to come, but I wanted to get you all thinking about tests you’d like to see run.

 

 

a9, The Last Word

← Sony a9 read noise anomalies & shutter modes Sony a9 dynamic battery draw →

Comments

  1. Joel says

    June 7, 2017 at 3:42 pm

    Would be curious to know if mechanical vs electronic makes a difference. Also if the “sleep” mode actually saves significant power vs turning the camera fully off. The start up time is improved but not perfect. Thanks for all these tests!

    Reply
  2. Maciej says

    June 7, 2017 at 6:07 pm

    If possible please check power draw with:
    – “Remote ON” and “Remote OFF”. There was some speculation ON can increase power usage significantly.
    – “Airplane Mode”
    – LCD Sunny weather vs Highest standard brightness

    Reply
    • Horshack says

      June 8, 2017 at 10:25 am

      “Remote ON” keeps the camera from going to low-power standby so that it’s available to respond to the remote, so I think it’s safe to say it’s not speculation.

      Reply

Trackbacks

  1. Sony a9 dynamic battery draw says:
    June 8, 2017 at 5:14 pm

    […] I reported some preliminary dc current drains for the a9 in several modes. Today I’m going to look at current draw as a function of time. When I did […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.