Seems like there is a lot of misinformation on the subject so I did some research that I wanted to share with you. Basically Canon wanted to be certain to capture market share throughout the world, something that Nikon already has done with their chargers interchangeability of cords to suit various international destinations when sold outside the United States. The LC-E6
has its advantages as it is all in one however the plug isn't interchangeable to foreign electrical outlets. Then came along an equal to the Nikon charger with the interchangeable electrical cord, the LC-E6E
, the last E in the title stands for electrical cord we can assume.
The manufacture of the corded model is a lighter weight with plastic molding similar to Nikon's designs. It seems that it is better suited in humid and arid locations than its sister metallic LC-E6
due to the corrosive nature of humid environments existing in many (but not all) of the target countries that would need the different extension plug types. The internal parts are almost identical with some slight differences in the way the light emitting diode exhibits the charge level of the battery being charged is one. Recharging starts automatically and the charge lamp blinks in orange.
|about 2.5 hours
*at 23 deg C / 73 deg F
The interesting aspect of this corded charger is its resilience, since it was designed for countries such as Brazil as an example, where the weather can be quite , well...Wet. The design is more durable than its sister metallic version the LC-E6
to allow for accidental exposure to the elements which exist there and other similar counties in which this charger would be necessary. This being a prerequisite of its internal design has its advantages however I wouldn't be willing to test it by dropping it into the Nile river.. but its nice to know.
In my opinion both chargers have their distinct advantages but whether one is better than the other is only a matter of taste. Both chargers seem to do equally well in their purposes.