"Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Compact" = STUPID!!!!

On 4/15/2011 5:45 PM, RichA wrote:
Dpreview's poll on what to call them. The above is in the lead.
There will be some red faces around when a flattish, but large pro
camera with no mirror shows up. The D7s or something. If mirrors
still exist after 3 years, it will be because the camera companies
couldn't make the lenses good enough to cover a FF sensor correctly.


Participation is useless since none of us get to vote for EVIL. I
support EVIL, have long advocated EVIL, and will likely gravitate to
EVIL cameras in the future. Long live EVIL!

On 17/04/2011 12:39 a.m., Bowser wrote:
On 4/15/2011 5:45 PM, RichA wrote:
Dpreview's poll on what to call them. The above is in the lead.
There will be some red faces around when a flattish, but large pro
camera with no mirror shows up. The D7s or something. If mirrors
still exist after 3 years, it will be because the camera companies
couldn't make the lenses good enough to cover a FF sensor correctly.


Participation is useless since none of us get to vote for EVIL. I
support EVIL, have long advocated EVIL, and will likely gravitate to
EVIL cameras in the future. Long live EVIL!

Whatever wins their poll, it is hard to imagine it ever overcoming EVIL.

Apteryx

On 2011-04-16 05:39:27 -0700, Bowser said:

On 4/15/2011 5:45 PM, RichA wrote:
Dpreview's poll on what to call them. The above is in the lead.
There will be some red faces around when a flattish, but large pro
camera with no mirror shows up. The D7s or something. If mirrors
still exist after 3 years, it will be because the camera companies
couldn't make the lenses good enough to cover a FF sensor correctly.


Participation is useless since none of us get to vote for EVIL. I
support EVIL, have long advocated EVIL, and will likely gravitate to
EVIL cameras in the future. Long live EVIL!

It is astonishing that anyone is stupid enough to believe that the
camera companies can't make the lenses good enough to cover a FF sensor
correctly. They certainly managed to do it before there were digital
sensors. The lenses were good enough to cover a full frame of film
correctly.

Clearly there are a lot of noobs who have never known anything but
digital and who think that FF is something new.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On Sun, 17 Apr 2011 12:27:17 -0700, C J Campbell
wrote:

On 2011-04-16 05:39:27 -0700, Bowser said:

On 4/15/2011 5:45 PM, RichA wrote:
Dpreview's poll on what to call them. The above is in the lead.
There will be some red faces around when a flattish, but large pro
camera with no mirror shows up. The D7s or something. If mirrors
still exist after 3 years, it will be because the camera companies
couldn't make the lenses good enough to cover a FF sensor correctly.

It is astonishing that anyone is stupid enough to believe that the
camera companies can't make the lenses good enough to cover a FF sensor
correctly. They certainly managed to do it before there were digital
sensors. The lenses were good enough to cover a full frame of film
correctly.

Clearly there are a lot of noobs who have never known anything but
digital and who think that FF is something new.


No noobs, just RichA and we all know what the A stands for most of the
time.

On Sun, 17 Apr 2011 12:27:17 -0700, C J Campbell
wrote:

On 2011-04-16 05:39:27 -0700, Bowser said:

On 4/15/2011 5:45 PM, RichA wrote:
Dpreview's poll on what to call them. The above is in the lead.
There will be some red faces around when a flattish, but large pro
camera with no mirror shows up. The D7s or something. If mirrors
still exist after 3 years, it will be because the camera companies
couldn't make the lenses good enough to cover a FF sensor correctly.


Participation is useless since none of us get to vote for EVIL. I
support EVIL, have long advocated EVIL, and will likely gravitate to
EVIL cameras in the future. Long live EVIL!

It is astonishing that anyone is stupid enough to believe that the
camera companies can't make the lenses good enough to cover a FF sensor
correctly. They certainly managed to do it before there were digital
sensors. The lenses were good enough to cover a full frame of film
correctly.

Clearly there are a lot of noobs who have never known anything but
digital and who think that FF is something new.

But then there is the problem of telecentrity. A lot of excellent
lenses from the film era will not adequately cover a full-frame
digital sensor in that their light falls too far from the
perpendicular at the corners of the image. That's why its easier to
cover a smaller sensor.

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2011-04-18 11:20:56 -0700, John A. said:

On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 11:01:09 -0700, C J Campbell
wrote:

On 2011-04-16 05:39:27 -0700, Bowser said:

On 4/15/2011 5:45 PM, RichA wrote:
Dpreview's poll on what to call them. The above is in the lead.
There will be some red faces around when a flattish, but large pro
camera with no mirror shows up. The D7s or something. If mirrors
still exist after 3 years, it will be because the camera companies
couldn't make the lenses good enough to cover a FF sensor correctly.


Participation is useless since none of us get to vote for EVIL. I
support EVIL, have long advocated EVIL, and will likely gravitate to
EVIL cameras in the future. Long live EVIL!

As DP Review pointed out, that will never fly with the marketing folks.

As far as I am concerned, these are Single Lens Electronic Viewfinder
cameras, or SLEVs. Slightly more pronounceable than SLR or DSLR, and
less of a mouthful than mirrorless camera. It is also more exact, since
most types of cameras do not have mirrors anyway. After all,
rangefinder and view cameras have no mirrors.

I think you could lump in a lot of phones under what SLEV describes.

True. But then, how long do you think it will be before we get a phone
with interchangeable lenses?

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On 4/18/2011 1:01 PM, C J Campbell wrote:


As far as I am concerned, these are Single Lens Electronic Viewfinder
cameras, or SLEVs. Slightly more pronounceable than SLR or DSLR, and
less of a mouthful than mirrorless camera.

"MILC" rolls of the tongue rather easily even if it sounds a bit odd in
relation to a camera.

Eric Miller
www.dyesscreek.com

In article , John A.
wrote:

On Tue, 03 May 2011 21:29:52 -0500, Eric Miller
wrote:
snip
"MILC" rolls of the tongue rather easily even if it sounds a bit odd in
relation to a camera.

I say we reserve that one for "Medium-format I'd Like to Click".

Well played sir!

--
To de-mung my e-mail address:- fsnospam$elliott$$
PGP Fingerprint: 1A96 3CF7 637F 896B C810 E199 7E5C A9E4 8E59 E248