Rant about the term "ZLR"

Bryan Olson wrote:
We should do away with the term "ZLR".


In language, theory follows practice. Meaning is defined by usage
and understanding, even when logic dictates otherwise.

We express aperture by F-number; unfortunately, as aperture increases,
F-number decreases. Electricity is the flow of electrons; strangely
that flow is from negative charge to positive. "Thoroughbred" is a
breed of horse, not a description of purity of breed. Compulsive
workers are "workaholics", even though there is no such thing as
"workahol".

Lamentable as the above terminology may be, any opportunity to fix it
has passed. The pioneers of optics and particle physics have won
immortal recognition, as they deserved. Those who coined and adopted
the term "workaholic" were not slapped silly -- as they deserved.

The past is fixed, and we are far too few to alter established usage.
The best we can do is to avoid making matters worse. Let's not adopt
terms that are counter-intuitive, technically wrong, and, well, stupid.
That's where "ZLR" comes in.

"ZLR" literally stands for "zoom lens reflex". Despite its literal
meaning, people use it to to mean cameras with electronic viewfinders.
(Sometimes they also assume "ZLR" means a fixed lens. It's not clear
whether they are deliberately considering only current fixed-lens
cameras, or whether they merely lack the wit to think further.)
The term is counter-intuitive, technically wrong, and stupid. It
has not yet entered common usage, so there is still time to correct
this error.

I have bought exactly two digital cameras (for within a few pennies
of the same price): A Sony F-707, and a Canon Digital Rebel with kit
lens. Both fit the "ZL" in "ZLR" by having a zoom lens. The Canon
Digital Rebel had "reflex"; the Sony F-707 did not. Thus the Canon
was a 'zoom lens reflex', while the Sony was not. So utterly stupid
is the proposed meaning of "ZLR" that my Sony F-707 would be a "ZLR",
and my Canon Digital Rebel would not. Why should we fabricate and
adopt terminology that is so contrary to fact?

So let's say what is right. When we mean "through the lens", let's
say so; "TTL" works. If we mean an electronic viewfinder, then "EVF"
is perfectly clear. A fixed lens is a non-interchangeable lens, and
let's say one of those, even if there isn't an established
abbreviation. This term "ZLR" is crap to be flushed.


Brian,
Well, drive on 'parkways', and park on 'driveways'. Why should we
get excited about 'ZLR'? Grin.

Leonard wrote:
David J Taylor wrote:

wrote:
[]

Aparrently the cameras that are being described by ZLR shouldn't
even have the "R" part, because they do not have a mirror to
reflect the image onto a viewing screen (usually ground/etched
glass).

[]

The reflex is electronic - not optical.

Surely it's the ground-glass that's replaced by electronics. There
is no reflex in an EVF camera.

I'd say that the way EVF operates is more like what you get with a
view camera. The electronic nature of it means that you don't have
to swap the viewing plate for a film holder when you want to take -
because viewing and taking now use the same component.

- Len

Yes, but on a ground glass screen the image is upside down. The
electonics reflects that image to display it the right way up. I suppose,
pedantically, you caould even say that the LCD is mounted upside-down!
"Reflex" has a broader meaning than just optics.

David

"Bryan Olson" wrote in message
. net...
We should do away with the term "ZLR".

I have never heard this abbreviation used - have you just made it up ?

What fun! All you guys explaining physics are missing the point.
Of course, physicists know that the charge on an electron is negative
and electrons flow from the negative to positive terminals of a
power source. But, any dufus can tell you that things naturally flow
from where there's more (+) to where there's less (-). And there are
a lot more dufuses than physicists in the world.

Okay, I'm not going to get into name calling, but does this mean that
dufus's think that rivers flow from the ocean onto land where there is less
(-) water?


Eric Miller

Maybe that's why I never heard of it until now. But I've heard of
"chicken fried steak" many times. Do people really talk of "chicken
fried chicken"? How does it differ from fried chicken?


Well, and this is just my opinion, but I think that the usage of this word
was a shortcut to "chicken fried steak fried chicken." It's a "chicken fried
steak" but with chicken.

Eric Miller

RustY© wrote:
"Bryan Olson" wrote in message
. net...
We should do away with the term "ZLR".

I have never heard this abbreviation used - have you just made it up ?

Not at all! Please see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZLR

There is a newsgroup devoted to ZLRs:

rec.photo.digital.zlr

David

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 11:16:20 +0100, Philip Homburg wrote:
In article Ewbkf.23151$Gd6.19543@pd7tw3no,
Matt Ion wrote:
If you really wanna get into it, "electric current" IS considered to
"flow" from positive to negative, and it does so at very near the speed
of light.

What kind of experiment proves that current flows from positive to negative
and not the other way around? (Just curious. My understanding is that
what is important are current changes what causes the current change.
Information does not travel faster than the speed of light, so the current
change spreads from the point that caused the current change).

The classic experiment for determining the actual sign of charge
carriers is the Hall Effect. Stripped to the basics, if you flow a
current in the presence of a magnetic field, a voltage is created
perpendicular to the direction of current flow. The sign of the voltage
depends on the sign of the charge carriers.

Poor Hall, though. This was his PhD thesis work (back in the late 19th
century), and his results didn't make any sense. He measured a whole
bunch of metals and found that most of them had negative carriers
(electrons). Some, however, had _positive_ carriers, and he had no idea
why. The half-assed explanation that he came up with didn't appeal to
his advisor, and he nearly didn't graduate.

It would eventually take quantum mechanics and band theory to explain
hole-dominated conductivity.

-dms, went to the same graduate program as Hall, though a century later.

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 07:10:31 -0600, millereric wrote:

Maybe that's why I never heard of it until now. But I've heard of
"chicken fried steak" many times. Do people really talk of "chicken
fried chicken"? How does it differ from fried chicken?


Well, and this is just my opinion, but I think that the usage of this word
was a shortcut to "chicken fried steak fried chicken." It's a "chicken fried
steak" but with chicken.

Ah, thanks for the explanation. That makes sense. Sounds good
too, at least to someone with the palate of an Elvis. I wonder when
it originated and if he had a chance to try hot chicken fried
chicken sandwich?

On $DATE , Bryan Olson wrote:

We should do away with the term "ZLR".


In language, theory follows practice. Meaning is defined by
usage and understanding, even when logic dictates otherwise.

We express aperture by F-number; unfortunately, as aperture
increases,
F-number decreases. Electricity is the flow of electrons;
strangely that flow is from negative charge to positive.
"Thoroughbred" is a breed of horse, not a description of purity
of breed. Compulsive workers are "workaholics", even though there
is no such thing as "workahol".

Lamentable as the above terminology may be, any opportunity to
fix it has passed. The pioneers of optics and particle physics
have won immortal recognition, as they deserved. Those who coined
and adopted the term "workaholic" were not slapped silly -- as
they deserved.

The past is fixed, and we are far too few to alter established
usage. The best we can do is to avoid making matters worse. Let's
not adopt terms that are counter-intuitive, technically wrong,
and, well, stupid. That's where "ZLR" comes in.

"ZLR" literally stands for "zoom lens reflex". Despite its
literal meaning, people use it to to mean cameras with electronic
viewfinders. (Sometimes they also assume "ZLR" means a fixed
lens. It's not clear whether they are deliberately considering
only current fixed-lens cameras, or whether they merely lack the
wit to think further.) The term is counter-intuitive, technically
wrong, and stupid. It has not yet entered common usage, so there
is still time to correct this error.

I have bought exactly two digital cameras (for within a few
pennies
of the same price): A Sony F-707, and a Canon Digital Rebel with
kit
lens. Both fit the "ZL" in "ZLR" by having a zoom lens. The
Canon Digital Rebel had "reflex"; the Sony F-707 did not. Thus
the Canon was a 'zoom lens reflex', while the Sony was not. So
utterly stupid is the proposed meaning of "ZLR" that my Sony
F-707 would be a "ZLR",
and my Canon Digital Rebel would not. Why should we fabricate
and adopt terminology that is so contrary to fact?

So let's say what is right. When we mean "through the lens",
let's say so; "TTL" works. If we mean an electronic viewfinder,
then "EVF" is perfectly clear. A fixed lens is a
non-interchangeable lens, and let's say one of those, even if
there isn't an established
abbreviation. This term "ZLR" is crap to be flushed.


I've no objection to "flushing" it, as I've never used it
before,... or heard of it. "TTL" has always meant
"Transistor-Transistor-Logic" to me. EVF is perfectly clear.
"Reflex could relate to the mirror. Why not just use "single
lens" without the "reflex" So my Fuji Finepix S9000 would then be
a DSL EVF +LCD, and that solves the whole matter PDQ.

--
Regards,
Fred.
(Please remove FFFf from my email address to reply, if by email)

Bryan Olson writes:

We should do away with the term "ZLR".

We ended up using it, as you perhaps remember, because people were
unhappy with "SLR" encoding interchangeable lenses (which it seems to,
from nearly 70 years of use for 35mm cameras). So we ended up with
"slr-systems" and "zlr". No, the cause doesn't seem to directly lead
to the effect, does it?
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/