Batteries for camera: AA or built in?
 

I am thinking about buying a new camera a low end actually. The Nikon model is powered by a couple of AA batteries and the Sony model (Sony DSCWX350 ) uses a NP-BX1 battery with an outside adapter.

The question is (and based on your experience) what is better and gives more flexibility the AA battery where one can travel with some spare ones, or the built-in batteries?

Thanks in advance.

I have used cameras with AA batteries but have switched to a DSLR with a dedicated battery. The trick is to make sure you'll always have a second set, or battery, available. The dedicated batteries are more expensive but buy a second one (if you decide to go for the Sony) and you won't regret it.

I always go for the AA, re-chargeable of course and travel with a spare set and a charger.
You always have the option to simply grab a couple of throw aways from a shop.

All of my current cameras (Canon) use their own dedicated battery pack. I always have a spare fully charged pack (or two) with me in the bag. The only inconvenience is that where one is travelling over a period of more than a couple of days, you probably should take a charger and it's power cable. It's one more thing to pack, lug around - and accidentally leave in a hotel room.

Buy the camera you really like, and accept the minor complication of its battery requirements including a spare OEM pack if it's needed.

BTW Sony is reported to be very good, and the specs quoted for the model you mention are impressive. Best of luck with your new purchase - whatever you decide.

FOR

Thanks for the answers.

Jhieminga, I am not traveling much any more so the spare battery would wait for the now.

FullOppositeRudder the point about one more thing to forget at the hotel is a strong one. Hopefully an ex taught me about a last look around so it won't happen.

Lantern10, my thoughts exactly but the Nikon was bulkier and did not have a WiFi which is something I consider useful. So the choice was made and a SONY was ordered.