So I have the Ansmann battery subjected to a comparison test with the original battery on video basis. In addition I have my EOS 600D in the lowest resolution mode (640-25) so let run until the camera has turned off due to empty battery. All half an hour when the camera reached the maximum recording time has been restarted. Both batteries were already emptied several times in recent months and loaded again and were taken directly from the charger before the test.
The Canon battery was tested once, the Ansmann battery twice to secure the result. In the first round the camera was directed at a wall, so no moving images. In the second test with the Ansmann battery the TV picture was filmed, so moving images. That is because I do not know whether the camera for moving images need more processing power, thus more energy. The result here has but made no significant difference. It was striking to me that the Ansmann battery was very warm after the second round, when I took him out of the camera.
The Ansmann battery fits into the camera as well as in the charger, Erkennungspropleme I had been none. However, a protective cover for storage when not in use lacks. Here help of the protective cover of the Canon batteries.
Unfortunately, one negative is the EOS 600D also a property: it shows the dead battery in only shortly before the end of the battery. A permanent display of the battery charge state is not indoors.
Now for the results.
CHIP.DE has made the video duration of the Canon battery with 1 hour and 39 minutes. I take this test of CHIP.DE on in my evaluation. While testing the Canon 3x battery creates the half-hour + 17 minutes resulting in total 1 hour and 47 minutes. I therefore consider my earnings as hedged.
The Ansmann battery thus creates in the first round also 3x the half hour and then another 4.5 minutes in total 1 hour and just under 35 minutes. On the second try I get to 1 hour and 33 minutes.
Evaluation:
------------- ----- Canon Ansmann
1. Test ------ ------ 1:39 1:35
2. Test ------ ------ 1:47 1:33