Rant about the term "ZLR"

On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 05:25:31 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote:



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

_A_ bra, but a _pair_ of pants.

On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 16:28:44 -0800, wrote:

People hear the word "gate"
and "get" the connection to a "scandal" of some sort. KoreaGate,
MonicaGate, PlameGate, etc.

-aholicgate

And there really are Gateaholics. Some of them shouldn't be
confused with more simpleminded of conspiracy theorists. We could
use more, but for every DealeyPlazaGate (sp?) there'd be a
ChappaquiddickGate to compensate. I wonder how DeLayGate is
progressing. I hear that he and his lobbyist buddies are real
Indian givers.

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?

There isn't one that I'm aware of... I just said that it's CONSIDERED to
flow that way. For the purpose of diagramming electronics,
positive-to-negative flow is generally the accepted norm.

To get back on subject, I could do without the term "ZLR". It doesn't
bother me, but it does bother a lot of people. How 'bout "fixed zoom",
"fun zoom", "almost a dSLR", or insert your idea here.

I still think "point & shoot" covers it nicely.


It is 'high-end' point & shoot because they have an EVF.

Not necessarily. I've seen some pretty fancy, expensive P&S cameras
that don't have an EVF... and some really cheap ones that do.


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0548-2, 12/03/2005
Tested on: 12/3/2005 10:57:33 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com

John A. Stovall wrote:
On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 01:41:42 GMT, 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".


Before ranting about terms, I suggest you learn how to correctly
express the f-number. It is a lower case, "f" .

f-word?


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0548-2, 12/03/2005
Tested on: 12/3/2005 11:04:19 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com

wrote:
On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 08:32:42 +0000 (UTC), (Dave
Martindale) wrote:



It can be, if you forget that convention for the wind. Suppose you're
doing airplane navigation problems; the plane's velocity vector is a
vector in the direction you read from the compass, but a reported wind
direction of N degrees has to be added as a vector in the direction
N+180. It would be simpler if the wind was reported by the direction
it's going to, not coming from.


However, the characteristics of a wind are determined by the
direction of the source. It seemss odd to think of an icy blast of
wind as a South Wind.

....unless you live in, say, southern Chile.



---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0548-2, 12/03/2005
Tested on: 12/3/2005 11:07:02 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com

Is Olympus even still making those turkeys? I think your rant may be about
5 years late.

--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html

"Bryan Olson" wrote in message
. net...
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.


--
--Bryan

Matt Ion wrote:
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?

There isn't one that I'm aware of... I just said that it's CONSIDERED to
flow that way. For the purpose of diagramming electronics,
positive-to-negative flow is generally the accepted norm.

Ummm... I was about to ask if you were sure about that. But then I
checked my old copy of Horowitz and Hill, and found this: "By
convention, current in a circuit is considered to flow from a more
positive point to a more negative point, even though the actual
electron flow is in the opposite direction." It would seem like
you'd get yourself bollixed up if there were semiconductors in the
circuit and you needed to know what was really going on, but that's
what the book says.

To get back on subject, I could do without the term "ZLR". It doesn't
bother me, but it does bother a lot of people. How 'bout "fixed zoom",
"fun zoom", "almost a dSLR", or insert your idea here.

I still think "point & shoot" covers it nicely.

It is 'high-end' point & shoot because they have an EVF.

Not necessarily. I've seen some pretty fancy, expensive P&S cameras
that don't have an EVF... and some really cheap ones that do.

Right. It's the long zoom SLR-like manual control that distinquishes
the so-called "ZLR" from the point-n-shoots, not the EVF.

Paul Allen

In article ,
says...
_A_ bra, but a _pair_ of pants.



This one I can cover!!!

Pants, derived (some where in western Europe, I forget where, maybe
Spain)from the word "Pantaloon" which were made of leather (like
"Chapppes" (later shortened to "Chaps")) and put on one per leg, and
only sometimes laced together (like chaps) at the top.

So if you had 2 legs, you needed a PAIR of "pantaloons".

In Early American lexicon "pantaloons" usually referred to something
worn by women, so we kinda' lost the refference point.

All this was told me by a History teacher back in High school in the
early 60's, who could have been making it up, but why would he bother.
It was in response to a question about language used in Early American
history.. The question was "Why are pants reffered to as a PAIR?"

Larry Lynch
Mystic, CT

In article ,
Paul Allen "paul dot l dot allen at comcast dot net" wrote:
Matt Ion wrote:
Philip Homburg wrote:
It is 'high-end' point & shoot because they have an EVF.

Not necessarily. I've seen some pretty fancy, expensive P&S cameras
that don't have an EVF... and some really cheap ones that do.

Right. It's the long zoom SLR-like manual control that distinquishes
the so-called "ZLR" from the point-n-shoots, not the EVF.

Hmm, my SLR doesn't have a zoom (well, I have a couple of zooms, but I hardly
ever use them).

So, an SLR feature that my SLR doesn't have is used to determine whether a
camera is to be called a P&S or a ZLR.

Is SLR-like manual control of a zoom that you touch the lens to zoom?
With video cameras, I want manual focus to be by rotating a mechanically
coupled focusing ring in the lens. Zoom works fine if it is electronic.

It strikes me as odd that mechanical control of zoom would be a
distinguishing factor for a line of cameras.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency

ASAAR writes:

Hey! You did get it!!! But "photograpoholic"? No way. Way
too long. Snapaholoc, maybe.

Photoholic, obviously.

Come to think of it, fixed focus, or non-focusing cameras were
followed by "rangefinders". Not the most apt term, but I guess most
people knew what it meant from associations with gunners dialing in
the range or elevation before firing the shot. But the SLRs that
followed didn't exactly do away with focusing, so why weren't they
called SLR Rangefinders?

A rangefinder is a device used to measure the distance to a target.
Older models use a split image system that when lined up will give a
readout of the distance on a scale (modern devices use a laser or
radar). Someone came up with idea to combine one of these with the
focusing system on a camera. The result became known as a rangefinder
camera. An SLR camera doesn't use such a system, and calling them
rangefinders would be incorrect.

--
Måns Rullgård