"Mirrorless" is fine, or just the brand names (Micro Four Thirds, NEX, etc.)

I manage a busy high-end/prosumer camera store in a major downtown metro area in the USA. We sell a lot of Micro Four Thirds and Alpha NEX cameras. I also hold a degree in Language from a top-tier US college. I think I'm qualified to comment on this. I report here that "mirrorless" is the term we find that is mainly used by our salespeople, whereas customers generally use the brand-names like "Micro Four Thirds," "PEN," "Lumix," or "NEX," sometimes wrongly applied (like using "Four Thirds" to refer to "Micro Four Thirds"). Further I argue that if we MUST use an acronym, then let us use something as close to "SLR" as possible, like "SLM" or even "SLR" itself, to avoid confusion.

Attempts to force the hand of language usually fail. Prescriptive grammars, even when they are entrenched in an educational system, can only hope to have a minor influence vis-a-vis the real forces that affect language, which are psychological forces and the unyielding will of the masses. Perhaps by some ingenious seeding activity at the highest levels of media dissemination, ala Karl Rove, certain new terms can be supplanted in place of old ones -- but only if the leaders of culture and media parrot the term incessantly on the news, in advertising, etc.

DPReview and sites like it already play a role in the shaping of language in digital photography -- however not always for the best. For instance, the term "full frame" is used here only to refer to the 135-format, which today is only in use by a small minority of camera owners, and is quickly becoming useless as a point of reference for the next generation of camera users. "Full frame" ought to also refer to whenever a DX-format lens is used on a DX-format camera, or when a Four Thirds lens is used on a Four Thirds camera, etc. Those are also "full frame" relationships, yet the original actual meaning of "full frame" has become lost, and it has come to only mean "135-format" now. Where are the DPReview language police on that issue?

Why is it only on the issue of the terminology used to refer to "mirrorless" cameras that DPReview has decided to attempt to shape language use in a proper way? Why have they themselves continued the misuse of the term "full frame" in a way that priveleges only 135-format, even though that format is largely irrelevant to the vast majority of camera buyers, the younger of whom have generally never used 35mm film, and are totally unfamiliar with the lens focal length meanings that are used on all the DPReview lens angle descriptions?

Why does DPReview not simply put the actual angles of view in degrees, in its camera descriptions, instead of putting the 135-format focal length equivalencies everywhere? I think we can all agree that 135-format is strictly the domain of advanced prosumers and professional photographers -- people who can afford $2000+ cameras. This represents a very small portion of the market. Why should we continue to base all of our convention on a format that has become the new medium format?

I think the answer most of you will give is, "Who are you to debate this? That's just the convention! We've been using that terminology for 10 years and we're not about to stop now just because you think it's illogical! It's the accepted terminology, logical or not." OK, well in that case, apply that same attitude to the terminology for "mirrorless" cameras.

My point is: we ARE calling them "mirrorless cameras," logical or not. That's simply the term that seems to be becoming prevalent. This is obvious. That's why it was the term that DPReview chose for their headline, "What should we call mirrorless cameras?" because we ARE calling them that, already. So apply your argument to this as well, and simply accept that this is the new convention.

Why is "mirrorless" taking over as the term for these cameras? For one thing, "mirrorless" rolls easily off the tongue. The term "SLR" also rolls of the tongue. So does "Yahoo" and "Google" and "Facebook." Also perhaps it's because "mirrorless" is NOT an acronym -- I don't think people generally like acronyms; I think they usually prefer words that mean something. Photography is technical enough as it is without yet another acronym. Our salespeople prefer a term that will require minimal explanation and is easy to say. "Mirrorless" just works.

(continued in next post)

Perhaps "Mirrorless" is also being used because it distinguishes what these cameras are vis-a-vis the previous generation of cameras, much in the same way that "single lens reflex" distinguished that type of camera from the previous generation of cameras before it ("twin lens" box cameras). The way the human mind linguistically categorizes things is often by means of distinction -- a car with a removable roof is a "convertible," whether it's a sports car, roadster, or sedan. People don't call it a "convertible car," it's just a "convertible." So also we don't need to call them "mirrorless interchangeable lens" or "interchangeable lens live view only" or anything else -- "mirrorless" suffices just fine.

But if you MUST have an acronym, I'd suggest just "SLR," so that it will make more sense. Honestly, I'd just use "SLR" and call them "single lens rangefinder." After all, why do we really NEED to distinguish them from mirror-based cameras? They have the same sensors, the same image quality, most of the same features, and often times they even look the same. Camera resellers who aren't using "mirrorless" usually group them in with the other "DSLRs." Newegg.com groups mirrorless cameras under the "DSLR" category. And why not?

To most people, there is no real functional difference between DSLR and mirrorless -- and fixed-mirror cameras like the Sony A33/A55 further cause problems for those who wish to create more and more useless categories. At the end of the day, the vast majority of consumers don't care HOW the autofocus works (whether it uses a reflex mirror, a fixed mirror, or none at all). Often, they don't even really care if the lens is interchangeable or not. What most consumers care about is speed, image quality, video quality, and ergonomics (read: size). When people ask for an SLR, that's what they are after -- they could care less if there is a mirror or not, frankly. As long as it performs much better than their "point-and-shoot" camera, who cares how this goal is accomplished inside the device?

The only factor consumers really seem to understand and worry about is the fact of having an SLR-sized sensor. For example, what if Canon made an interchangeable lens version of the popular G12, but still used the same tiny sensor? Would that count as a "mirrorless" camera, or as an "DSLR" (if we count mirrorless cameras into the DSLR category)? I think we can all say that it shouldn't count as an SLR. Well, what if it had a tiny mirror that reflexed? What then? I understand that Canon will never actually make such a product, but my point is that the sensor size being an order of magnitude larger than "point-and-shoot" cameras is much more important to the definition of the product category than whether or not the camera has a mirror inside, or even if it has interchangeable lenses (the Leica X1 and similar are worthy of being grouped in with the Olympus PEN, I think it's fair to say).

My final word is this: to most people, "DSLR" functionally encompasses "single lens reflex" and "single lens rangefinder" (aka "mirrorless") cameras. (These days you might as well drop the "D" from the acronym, since nowadays "digital" is assumed. In 2011, people who want a film camera ask for a "film SLR," whereas people who want a digital SLR just ask for "an SLR.") So you might as well just call them "mirrored" and "mirrorless" SLRs.

-=DG=-

dark goob said:

But if you MUST have an acronym, I'd suggest just "SLR," so that it will make more sense. Honestly, I'd just use "SLR" and call them "single lens rangefinder."

Click to expand...

I don't like your suggestion that SLR — Single Lens Rangefinder — is an acceptable acronym, but I must admit your argumentation is absolutely sound, without any real flaws.

In photography, the term "rangefinder" has been used to designate a distance — i.e. range — measurement mechanism, based on the angular difference — a.k.a. parallax — that exists when a subject is observed from two separate vantage points. The distance between the vantage points is the rangefinder "base length".

On a Leica M rangefinder camera, for example, the lenses forming the rangefinder base are positioned about 69 millimeters apart.

In its purest form, the role of a rangefinder system is to determine the distance to the subject; in photographic applications, that distance information can then be used e.g. for focusing.

It's important to note that a "rangefinder" does not have to obligatorily use a parallax-based optical system. In fact, Leica also sells "laser rangefinders" for the professional surveying market that measure the distance to a target by measuring the arrival time of the laser light reflected by the subject.

With cameras, both the phase detection and contrast detection autofocus mechanisms can provide distance information: in effect, they measure the lens registration distance at which optimal focus is achieved; said registration distance, combined with the focal length, allows a direct derivation of the subject's distance using simple laws of geometric optics.

Thus, it is technically correct that with cameras, any focusing mechanism is, in fact, a rangefinder.

Thus, I must grudgingly admit that your suggested acronym — Single Lens Rangefinder — is, from a technical point of view, totally correct.

Furthermore, from a semantics point of view, the long-established "Single Lens" expression — as in "Single Lens Reflex" — manages to convey the common expectation with the mirrorless cameras under consideration that the lens be interchangeable.

One should also note that the two major factors characterizing a digital imaging system are the sensor and the lens. A mirrorless camera with an interchangeable mount can use, just like a SLR, specialized optics like tilt/shift lenses, macro bellows attachments, fish-eye lenses, superteles etc. As there isn't any practical difference between the photographic results obtained, say, with a mirrorless camera with an APS-sized sensor and a SLR with an APS-sized sensor, it is actually extremely dubious whether it's meaningful to insist on separating the SLR and mirrorless camera classes.

dark goob said:

But if you MUST have an acronym, I'd suggest just "SLR," so that it will make more sense. Honestly, I'd just use "SLR" and call them "single lens rangefinder." After all, why do we really NEED to distinguish them from mirror-based cameras?

Click to expand...

dark goob said:

To most people, there is no real functional difference between DSLR and mirrorless --

The only factor consumers really seem to understand and worry about is the fact of having an SLR-sized sensor.

Click to expand...

dark goob said:

My final word is this: to most people, "DSLR" functionally encompasses "single lens reflex" and "single lens rangefinder" (aka "mirrorless") cameras. (These days you might as well drop the "D" from the acronym, since nowadays "digital" is assumed. In 2011, people who want a film camera ask for a "film SLR," whereas people who want a digital SLR just ask for "an SLR.") So you might as well just call them "mirrored" and "mirrorless" SLRs.

Click to expand...

Bizarre, sounds like you have a grudge against SLRs, particularly full-frame ones...

Mirrorless is politically incorrect. These cameras should be called Mirror-Challenged.

The acronym can then be MC, which can stand for Mirrorless Camera or Mirror-Challenged.

Thanks, Antisthenes. I think traditionalists may not like it, but just calling them "Single Lens Rangefinder" or SLR is easy enough -- and "mirrorless" whenever a distinction is needed.

Today, I even found myself calling a Nikon D5100 a "mirrored" model as opposed to the normal "mirrorless" options.

-=DG=-

mirrorless interchangeable lens format

Le Kilt said:

Bizarre, sounds like you have a grudge against SLRs, particularly full-frame ones...

Click to expand...

Actually, I have made no sound. Also you have misread me.

I primarily shoot a full-frame DSLR: the Olympus E-5. All my lenses are full-frame, relative to the sensor of the E-5. That is to say, my Leica Summilux-D 25mm f/1.4 projects a 4/3" image frame, and the sensor of the E-5 "fills" that frame.

The only "crop" lens that I use is an Olympus OM Zuiko 50mm f/1.8, which of course is a "crop" lens when used on the E-5, much the same as a T-shirt with its sleeves and trunk cut off is a "crop top" when worn by a beautiful woman.

But I digress. TBH, I know what you mean by "full frame" -- you harken back to the day when the 135-format (AKA 35mm film) was king, and its "frame" was the only game in town. Of course, that was 10 years ago.

Today, in mid-2011, the percentage of camera buyers who will purchase a 135-format camera -- such as the Canon 5D MK II, Nikon D700, Sony A900, etc. -- is probably less than 2%. I just listed three cameras that were introduced in 2008, and are still current models.

Today, I have customers who are in their early 20s and who have never owned a 135-format camera. They come in shopping for a used film camera for its "vintage" caché. I find myself telling them that on film, a 28mm lens is equivalent to a standard 18mm focal length on a regular DSLR.

I don't hate 135-format, nor SLRs, nor frames that are filled. I just live in 2011. Welcome.

-=DG=-

justice strike said:

mirrorless interchangeable lens format

Click to expand...

Why do you have to tack on those last three words? What about the Fuji X100 and Leica X1...? They are not interchangeable lens, but they are mirrorless single-lens rangefinders.

Also, "format" does not belong. Four Thirds, DX, NX, NEX, and FX are formats.

-=DG=-

Anastigmat said:

Mirrorless is politically incorrect. These cameras should be called Mirror-Challenged.

The acronym can then be MC, which can stand for Mirrorless Camera or Mirror-Challenged.

Click to expand...

MC won't work, since it also stands for "mirrored camera."

-=DG=-

x100 and x1 are compact camera's totally unrelated to something like a sony nex.

I think that Mirrorless intergangeable lens format suits well. dx and fx are no formats btw. neither is enx nx or four thirds

dark goob said:

justice strike said:

mirrorless interchangeable lens format

Click to expand...

Why do you have to tack on those last three words? What about the Fuji X100 and Leica X1...? They are not interchangeable lens, but they are mirrorless single-lens rangefinders.

Also, "format" does not belong. Four Thirds, DX, NX, NEX, and FX are formats.

-=DG=-

Click to expand...

Mirrorless sounds logical now, but in 10 years when there will be no more mirror in an camera it will be obsolete.

--
Rick Halle wrote:

" Keep in mind that tall buildings sway back and forth so they require faster shutter speeds."

dark goob said:

I manage a busy high-end/prosumer camera store in a major downtown metro area in the USA. We sell a lot of Micro Four Thirds and Alpha NEX cameras. I also hold a degree in Language from a top-tier US college. I think I'm qualified to comment on this. I report here that "mirrorless" is the term we find that is mainly used by our salespeople, whereas customers generally use the brand-names like "Micro Four Thirds," "PEN," "Lumix," or "NEX," sometimes wrongly applied (like using "Four Thirds" to refer to "Micro Four Thirds"). Further I argue that if we MUST use an acronym, then let us use something as close to "SLR" as possible, like "SLM" or even "SLR" itself, to avoid confusion.

Click to expand...

"Single Lens" is quite wrong in this context.

• The term "single lens" has only ever qualified the kind of "reflex." It never ever qualified the kind of camera itself, because THAT was defined by the term "reflex."

• Naturally, if the camera in question is "mirror- less " then "reflex" is automatically wrong, isn't it?

See what I mean? If we remove the "reflex" feature of a camera, it's clear we don't need the "Single Lens" qualifier anymore. It is not just redundant, it is confusing.

• Not only is "single lens" wrong for mirrorless cameras, but it will stay wrong until somebody comes up with a mirrorless kind of camera that uses a number of lenses different to just a single one and creates the need to differentiate....

... as had previously happened to ordinary reflex type cameras when Rollie came along with their TWIN lensed kind of reflex in 1929. Up until then, "reflex"...

--(a camera type that had been around for 30+ years by that time)--

.... actually meant single-lensed simply because there wasn't any other kind, and nobody had to mention lens-count at all.

Do you appreciate the point, here? I hope so.
--
Regards,
Baz

"Ahh... But the thing is, they were not just ORDINARY time travellers!"