Spare battery

I believe you'd have to be, if only to get away with calling yourself 'Smeggypants'.

Why, is it against the law?

Not that I'm aware of. Although governments do make some strange laws at times.

have a look Here

I bought these and there fine, saved me a fortune

To be honest, I too use some of the eBay batteries and so far I have not seen any problems with them. I keep the original Pentax in the camera and use the eBay ones in the grip.
Having taken lately pictures with extreme long exposure time the battery drained for the first time after nearly 2000 shots that I had taken since the last charge.
So that's 2000 RAW+ files with one Pentax and one cheap battery and I still had 'juice' left but it was the first time that the battery meeter on the camera came ONE STEP down. I don't know how many shots I would have had left but I always carry two spares anyway.
Checking the cheap eBay batteries once a week for ANY sign of damage or leakage is also a good way to ensure to catch it in time as no leakage is sudden but you can see signs of it a long time before.
Common sense is the best prevention here. I have used cheap batteries this way for all the time since I started Digital and would have to have by today the first one where I cam say that I really can see the difference.
I guess that my next DSLR is about 5 years out (or if something comes along that is of real importance to ME it may be earlier) and if I have to get once or twice in that time a new set of cheap eBay ones I sill have had £100 of savings as the eBay ones (two) had cost me £9 incl. p&p where the Pentax ones would have cost £60+ each so that would have been a minimum of £120+.
Just use common sense, check the batteries regular, keep them dry and charged and have a couple of spares with you and you will be fine.
If you get a grip keep the third party battery in there and the Pentax in the camera. But keep on checking the grip one as third party grips are NOT weather proved and moisture may build up inside there (in particular in the winter). Should any damage occur (an if you keep checking it should not be) at least you keep it to the grip.

It's interesting, but human nature, that when a test is presented the reaction is to reject it as flawed because it doesn't reinforce what we want to be true. That's a basic problem with science at all levels. Add funding issues and yet more pressures are added to the mix. What happens when experimental results don't match the requirements of those providing the money?

Now this test concludes that the Pentax battery is the best option. It's OK saying "but my alternative is OK" but none of the alternatives tested were OK, so why should yours be?

So let's see the alternative test that proves the one published wrong...:

Incidentally, this is a generalised reply and not a comment on any individual's post.

John, it seems you are happy with a test that only measures accuracy of the claims on capacity. It doesn't measure relibility or quality of cells used in the battery. Both of which require somewhat longer testing. As we have seen with early K-5s and early 16-50mm lenses Pentax can't claim an unblemished reputation in either category.

I am neither happy nor unhappy with the test itself, it is what it is and can be judged on its own merits.

I think I've said enough times that I only buy original maufacturer's parts and why. As expected, the more expensive options turned out the best on this test, so it's open to someone to make more tests if they wish and prove things are otherwise if they can.

I guess that batteries last so long (for most of us) and the level of use between battery changes varies so much (amount of live view, viewing shots, video etc) that it's hard to have a very accurate idea of whether this battery performs better than that one...

As long as they keep us shooting for several days, and we can afford to have a spare to hand, it doesn't particularly matter.

For intensive professional use things may be a bit different.

By best you mean the claimed capacity is most accurate. More than that the test doesn't show.

And if somebody was to stop me and say ebay item description is wildly overstated, it's not news.

It seems the test confirms your pedjudices but as putchaser of a variety of products and from a variety of suppliers, I'll try and remain openminded.

Imagine we were talking about toilet paper, another boring but necessary item, rather than batteries. Adjusting the cost proportionally, and the outcome of the test:

Pentax toilet paper: £5.99 for 200 sheets.
Unbranded toilet paper: 50p for 120 sheets.

I know which I'd buy, even if it scratched my bum a bit.

If you had hemorrhoids, you'd buy the Pentax. (Sorry, couldn't resist).

Why shouldn't they be? There's no logic in the world that could claim that just because a few alternative batteries were deemed, on some criteria, to be inferior to a Pentax battery then ergo...ALL 3rd party batteries were inferior.

You seem to be applying the same false logic as Tyr who told me that my 3rd batteries ".... may have been fine function wise but the capacity will not be what is stated." without even seeing them or testing them simply becuase some test, which tested some other batteries said those betteries were inferior to eh Pentax battery

"what we want to be true"

I don't want anything to be true. All I know is the 3rd Batteries I've used in my cameras have been fine.


If I had hemorrhoids I'd buy Hassleblad toilet paper


No thanks - I'll spend the time taking pictures. I can think of little more boring that testing batteries.

I agree, the test probably has been done using 'one battery' or if lucky a couple. But batteries are made in batches. Same as the K-5, some had sensor stains, some didn't. That does not reflect the true picture of the batteries. You can get a 'lemon' from Pentax and you can get good ones from third parties.
I feel a test like this should be made over a longer time and getting different batches.
Also as longer as a make is available as better they MAY become.
Do not judge just one bad apple (sorry for the punt here) by the whole tree.
If it would be like that then Sigma lenses (and others) would be no good because they are not made by Pentax.

[quote:3496ace15f="Smeggypants"] I'd buy Hassleblad toilet paper [quote]

Need medium format, eh?