It has been reported that amorphization is effective for improving reversibility of TiS 3, 9, 11 MoO 2 12 and V 2O 5 13 in lithium secondary batteries. Moreover, cells using amorphous MoS 2 show not only higher capacity but also better rate performance than cells with crystalline materials.
ACCUPIX VS OTHERS FREE
suggested the advantages of amorphous active materials were attributed to their structural defects and free volume. reported that amorphization of TiS 3 suppressed irreversible structure change and led to an increase in reversible capacity. 9 We have also reported that amorphous TiS 3 showed high capacity in an all-solid-state sodium battery. 14 Sodium containing polysulfides as active materials for sodium batteries provide an extended choice of negative electrodes, however there are few reports about them. Sodium containing polysulfide Na 2TiS 3 was also expected to be a high capacity active material with similar performance to TiS 3. Structural flexibility and free volume resulting from amorphization would be also effective in improving the deintercalation of sodium ion from sodium containing active materials. In this letter, we synthesized crystalline Na 2TiS 3 ( c-Na 2TiS 3) and amorphous Na 2TiS 3 ( a-Na 2TiS 3) as sodium containing sulfides. We have compared their structural and electrochemical characters. All-solid-state cells with a-Na 2TiS 3 showed nearly twice the capacity (250 mAh g −1) as that of c-Na 2TiS 3 (140 mAh g −1) and the inserted and extracted sodium amounts of a-Na 2TiS 3 were similar to that of amorphous TiS 3. It is revealed that amorphization of Na 2TiS 3 is effective in increasing the reversible capacity.Ĭ-Na 2TiS 3 was synthesized by conventional solid phase reaction with heat treatment of Na 2S (Nagao Co. The mixture of the starting materials was placed into a carbon crucible and further sealed in a quartz tube under vacuum. The sealed sample was heated at 500 ☌ for 5 hours and slowly cooled in an electrical furnace. a-Na 2TiS 3 was prepared by mechanochemical synthesis from Na 2S and TiS 2. The mixture of the starting materials was poured into a 45 mL zirconia pot with 500 zirconia balls (4 mm in diameter), and mechanically milled at the rotation speed of 380 rpm for 10 hours. whatever the reason the 1:1 comparison doesn't coincide with any other test results that I have seen for this lens and sensor combination in Canon GX models.Powder X-ray diffraction XRD (CuK α) patterns of the prepared samples were obtained with a diffractmeter (SmartLab Rigaku). Perhaps we are looking at results from a faulty G5X, or perhaps I have made a mistake in downloading the images. The only optical compromise for the G7X seems to be the extreme corners at 24mm where details can become a little softer than the Sony RX100 III, but in the middle it looks fine and as soon as you start zooming the lens in, the Canon becomes crisp across the entire frame and enjoys a small but consistent lead over its rival." This is an impressive result for the Canon since it sports a range that extends 50% longer. Ultimately though from the results here I haven't seen anything that would make me choose the G7X over the RX100 III or vice versa when it comes to optical quality, as they're pretty closely matched. So I'd say the RX100 III enjoys a small edge over the G7X when both are at 24mm, but that the G7X enjoys a small lead at 50mm and 70mm. This time I'd say it's a repeat of what we saw at 50mm: namely that the G7X enjoys a slight lead over the RX100 III, delivering very crisp details across the entire frame, and that both models are noticeably superior to the older RX100 II.
"Next I zoomed all three cameras to 70mm - representing the maximum for the RX100 III - and again set their apertures to f4. I am almost speechless after having seen the two images at 1:1 in your gallery.įirstly I went back to cameralabs and Gordon's comparative review of the GX7, RX100M3 and RX100 M2
0 kommentar(er)
