Leica M240 series battery scarcity

[trix4ever]

I have a general observation / question regarding camera batteries and wonder if others have noticed the same thing..............................This seems as good a place as any to ask..............................

We all know that batteries will drain over time even if initially fully charged and the camera is unused. I have observed that with some cameras, if stored unused even with a with a fully charged battery, the battery will typically stay "fresh" for a prolonged period of time. While batteries in some other cameras seem to drain quite quickly when stored. (And yes, before you ask, the cameras are definitely turned off.) For example my impression is that a battery in my Sony A7s tends to drain quite rapidly in storage, while the battery in my Leica Q stays fresh for longer. Of course, it could be that I just have some spectacularly "sh#tty" after-market batteries for my Sony (though I have about 5-6 of them and this issue seems to apply to them all) but the Q possibly has better (though also after-market) batteries. Also my impression is that this is a more general thing than with just these two cameras.

The other possibility is that it relates to the age of specific batteries - which I am sure does occur - when batteries age they hold become less able to hold a charge but I am not sure if this is a complete explanation either, as my experience suggests that the issue applies to all of my several Sony batteries no matter their age and I also suspect that the draining is not so fast for the batteries that are stored in a pouch rather than actually in the camera.

Typically, of course these is also an internal system capacitor or battery or some such device to make sure camera settings are preserved even when the replaceable user battery is dead or missing - I suppose it is possible that these system batteries also draw power from the normal batteries even if the camera is off, when it becomes necessary should their voltage drop. If so, this might contribute to this phenomenon. But I am still of the view that some cameras are prone to draining battery charge in storage more rapidly than others.

Any ideas?

My D500 and S1r drain the battery quickly when parked, my M240, Q and SL hardly drain at all. I would also like to know why. My D500 and D810 use the same battery yet the D500 is dead in weeks. The D810 will not have changed in 3 months. Both on newish Nikon batteries.

 

[peterm1]

My D500 and S1r drain the battery quickly when parked, my M240, Q and SL hardly drain at all. I would also like to know why. My D500 and D810 use the same battery yet the D500 is dead in weeks. The D810 will not have changed in 3 months. Both on newish Nikon batteries.

Yep that is exactly what I am talking about. Weird!

 

[MNS]

Turning off turn the auto preview, GPS, wifi and set the auto power saving to the lowest value goes a long way to help battery life.

 

[peterm1]

Turning off turn the auto preview, GPS, wifi and set the auto power saving to the lowest value goes a long way to help battery life.

I do use auto preview (when the camera is on and I am using it to take pictures). But that is not what I am talking about. I am talking about an inexplicable level of battery power loss while the camera is turned off. And I never use GPS or WiFi for just the reasons you mention. And yet for some reason some cameras seem to eat batteries even when they should be completely off.

 

[Freakscene]

It mostly depends on how large the capacitor is that holds the settings. If it is small it discharges and charges repeatedly, and charging them is somewhat inefficient so it uses more charge than you may expect. If it is large it can hold the settings for months. Typically ‘professional’ cameras have larger capacitors and ‘amateur’ cameras have smaller ones, but space also matters. The Nikon D500 is a godd example - ‘pro’ but smaller than the D series so it has a small capacitor. Some mirrorless cameras are the same.

 

[trix4ever]

It mostly depends on how large the capacitor is that holds the settings. If it is small it discharges and charges repeatedly, and charging them is somewhat inefficient so it uses more charge than you may expect. If it is lrge it can hold the settings for months. Typically ‘professional’ cameras have larger capacitors and ‘amateur’ cameras have smaller ones, but space also matters. The Nikon D500 is a godd example - ‘pro’ but smaller than the D series so it has a small capacitor. Some mirrorless cameras are the same.

Well I see what you're saying but the D500 has a smaller sensor and mirror than the D810 yet is very little smaller, surely there would be room for a bigger capacitor? The D500 is well known for having a power management problem to the extent that Nikon even brought out a new battery and swapped it for free. It's still annoying that it drains to nothing in about 3 weeks, especially since I only use it with one lens, a 200-500mm for surfing and wildlife so it often sits for a while and is always dead when I go to use it.
Also no-one could say the S1r is a small camera...

 

[Freakscene]

Well I see what you're saying but the D500 has a smaller sensor and mirror than the D810 yet is very little smaller, surely there would be room for a bigger capacitor? The D500 is well known for having a power management problem to the extent that Nikon even brought out a new battery and swapped it for free. It's still annoying that it drains to nothing in about 3 weeks, especially since I only use it with one lens, a 200-500mm for surfing and wildlife so it often sits for a while and is always dead when I go to use it.
Also no-one could say the S1r is a small camera...

Yes, of course, there are also design choices. The D500 is notorious, as you point out. The S1r has more than one capacitor, and high internal demand because of its processor design to prioritise video use. So there are other influences. Perhaps I should have referred simply to ‘non-use power management’ but most of the cameras that are bad for chewing batteries while off have high non-use demand due to high internal cycling to maintain settings.

 

[chuckroast]

I have a general observation / question regarding camera batteries and wonder if others have noticed the same thing..............................This seems as good a place as any to ask..............................

We all know that batteries will drain over time even if initially fully charged and the camera is unused. I have observed that with some cameras, if stored unused even with a with a fully charged battery, the battery will typically stay "fresh" for a prolonged period of time. While batteries in some other cameras seem to drain quite quickly when stored. (And yes, before you ask, the cameras are definitely turned off.) For example my impression is that a battery in my Sony A7s tends to drain quite rapidly in storage, while the battery in my Leica Q stays fresh for longer. Of course, it could be that I just have some spectacularly "sh#tty" after-market batteries for my Sony (though I have about 5-6 of them and this issue seems to apply to them all) but the Q possibly has better (though also after-market) batteries. Also my impression is that this is a more general thing than with just these two cameras.

The other possibility is that it relates to the age of specific batteries - which I am sure does occur - when batteries age they hold become less able to hold a charge but I am not sure if this is a complete explanation either, as my experience suggests that the issue applies to all of my several Sony batteries no matter their age and I also suspect that the draining is not so fast for the batteries that are stored in a pouch rather than actually in the camera.

Typically, of course these is also an internal system capacitor or battery or some such device to make sure camera settings are preserved even when the replaceable user battery is dead or missing - I suppose it is possible that these system batteries also draw power from the normal batteries even if the camera is off, when it becomes necessary should their voltage drop. If so, this might contribute to this phenomenon. But I am still of the view that some cameras are prone to draining battery charge in storage more rapidly than others.

Any ideas?

I am not certain of the exact answer, but I can give you an informed guess.

Because "off" is not really off on many new electronic devices. Setting your camera to the off position may still leave background tasks running like keeping the clock up to date. More importantly, digital cameras have a computer in them no different than, say, your laptop. To give you rapid 'on' time, the operating system for that computer must already be booted and ready to go - at least for some hardware/software designs.

There is a simple way to test this. Remove a fully charged battery from a camera that is exhibiting battery discharge even while not being used. Let the battery sit outside the camera for the amount of time you've noticed it's been taking to discharge while in the camera body. After that amount of time has elapsed, put the battery back in the body. If the battery is still mostly or fully charged, the camera is the culprit. If the battery is noticeably discharged, its age or inherent design are causing it to not hold the charge.

One other thing... Indication of "fully charged" or "100% charged" can be misleading. Older or well used batteries can appear to charge fully but then discharge at far more rapid rates than a healthy battery.

 

[peterm1]

I am not certain of the exact answer, but I can give you an informed guess.

Because "off" is not really off on many new electronic devices. Setting your camera to the off position may still leave background tasks running like keeping the clock up to date. More importantly, digital cameras have a computer in them no different than, say, your laptop. To give you rapid 'on' time, the operating system for that computer must already be booted and ready to go - at least for some hardware/software designs.

There is a simple way to test this. Remove a fully charged battery from a camera that is exhibiting battery discharge even while not being used. Let the battery sit outside the camera for the amount of time you've noticed it's been taking to discharge while in the camera body. After that amount of time has elapsed, put the battery back in the body. If the battery is still mostly or fully charged, the camera is the culprit. If the battery is noticeably discharged, its age or inherent design are causing it to not hold the charge.

One other thing... Indication of "fully charged" or "100% charged" can be misleading. Older or well used batteries can appear to charge fully but then discharge at far more rapid rates than a healthy battery.

My observations suggest that for the most part it is as you suggest (and I did too) that some cameras keep using the battery when it is "off" - e.g. to recharge the capacitor which keeps some camera settings intact. The pattern of discharge already suggests something of this sort. But it's a good idea to test it in the manner you suggest. But it is "passing strange" that only certain cameras exhibit this characteristic (at least in my experience).

 

[chuckroast]

My observations suggest that for the most part it is as you suggest (and I did too) that some cameras keep using the battery when it is "off" - e.g. to recharge the capacitor which keeps some camera settings intact. The pattern of discharge already suggests something of this sort. But it's a good idea to test it in the manner you suggest. But it is "passing strange" that only certain cameras exhibit this characteristic (at least in my experience).

Keeping a capacitor charged for such purpose is a relatively low current/low power demand. There are likely more demanding background tasks running that are chewing up batteries where this is a problem. As I said, keeping the internal operating system "booted" and running for instant "on" is a likely candidate.

Different cameras exhibit differing degrees of this because they likely have fundamental differences in the design of their core processors, operating systems, and the batteries themselves.

 

[MNS]

Getting back to the battery problem, lack of.

I also emailed Leica Customer care in Germany sometime ago. While the response hasn't come back from Germany but London I thought I'd pin the reply for you all to see.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Today I was billed for my M240 Battery from Leica. The person taking the order stated they would not charge for it until it was ready to ship. $95, shipped.
I'll post once it arrives.

 

[boojum]

Today I was billed for my M240 Battery from Leica. The person taking the order stated they would not charge for it until it was ready to ship. $95, shipped.
I'll post once it arrives.

Getting a battery is nice, at that price, very nice.

 

[Ken Ford]

Today I was billed for my M240 Battery from Leica. The person taking the order stated they would not charge for it until it was ready to ship. $95, shipped.
I'll post once it arrives.

How did you go about doing this with Leica? Last I heard they said they weren’t taking backorders. Was yours from before then?

 

[Sonnar Brian]

@Ken Ford , I called the parts department using the phone number listed here.

 

[Archiver]

Given how much demand there seems to be for M240 batteries, and Leica's issues with supply chain, I wonder if it would be cost effective for them to go to another manufacturer. Or if this is unlikely due to contractual obligations with the original battery supplier. Who knows. I also wonder why there do not seem to be any generic M240 batteries.

 

[Ken Ford]

@Ken Ford , I called the parts department using the phone number listed here.

By the time I tried this they fobbed me off with the statement that the batteries were being converted back to an accessory and wouldn’t be sold through Parts any longer. I assume you started the process earlier? I’m glad you got in under the wire!

 

[boojum]

Leica sells cameras, new ones, not batteries. Get it? This is not the company that was run by the Leitz family. This is a company run by private equity.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Just got a UPS notofication - battery is in the mail.

Estimated Delivery Date:​

Tuesday, 07/01/2025​

 

[Sonnar Brian]

The battery arrived yesterday, has taken a full charge. It was packed in a little Brown Box, hand-written markings for the stock number "420240020000". SO- this really was handled like parts on order. I have an old Nikon F "C" screen with hand-written numbers on it.