Chris Noble
Veteran Member
Small things, not one-millionth things...
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Spirit of apology accepted, though I didn't actually take offense. I assume you refer to my earlier post (this seems to be a thread where many replies are not posted as actual replies). In my earlier reply to you, I did say that an inference of backwardness would be elitist. Someone else said that was my own inference and not your implication. If so I also apologize, but one must expect inferences to be drawn from language, so "blatant disregard" and "continuing fondness for..." implied resistance to modern practice, i.e. backwardness. Even those that find it "charming" are implying charming backwardness. I also realized that you were "noting" but not necessarily "condemning" the USA practices.xpatUSA wrote:
My apologies to anybody who took offense to that comment, no offense or elitism was intended!xpatUSA wrote:
The question is a little tongue-in-cheek . . . the USA, a country noted for it's blatant disregard of metric units and a continuing fondness for units like "MMSCFD" in gas pipelines or "MFD" of capacitance where, in the one, M means one thousand and, in the other, M means one millionth.
Good, and thanks for that clarification. As an engineer myself, I have pushed hard against mixing systems in our internal specifications, e.g. there is no longer much excuse for specifying chip sizes in mils when they were designed in microns. Mixing leads to confusion and potentially costly mistakes. I remember a failed Mars probe from 1999; it crashed because of an error stemming from imperial vs. metric units. Almost all USA manufacturing and engineering is metric today (not so much the building trades). However, I have never agreed with the urgency of converting daily-life thought and speech to metric.I actually moved to Texas from England many years ago. What a relief it was to get back to the real units that I grew up with in the 40's thru the 60's. So I'm quite fond of degs F, inches, mils, miles etc.
Yes, MFT is arguably better than M43 because it abbreviates the brand name. But still M4/3 reads easily, and then M43 is a small step away. So they're all understandable and none are wrong.However, I can be a little pedantic at times! So, I myself would be inclined toward "MFT" which pretty much removes those pesky units from the discussion.
Again, I don't know if you were referring to my reply. I did not write nor suggest that "m" means "micro". I did write that "M" means "Micro" in the context of the brand Micro Four Thirds, because you specifically started this whole thing by asking why people write "M43". And I did write that "u" doesn't alphabetically correspond to "µ", though I fully agree that the quick-access "um" is way preferable to "mm" which is obviously wrong in the context of unit prefixes.Continuing to be pedantic re: the poster who suggested that "m" means micro, how would we write a sensor pixel dimension (without a special character)? I've seen "um" used a lot for that but should we now write "mm" meaning micrometers or microns? ...
Most people can't figure out how or don't want to go to the trouble to enter a μ. Do keyboards in the UK typically have a μ?xpatUSA wrote:
While realizing it's too late for μ4/3" or even u43 to be generally acceptable, one can but dream . . . ;-)
The letter μ is a general abbreviation for the word 'micro', used not just in the world of SI measurement. Sort of like the Χ in "Χmas" is not intended to be the Latin letter 'x' but the Greek letter 'χ', the first letter of the word "Christ" in Greek - in both cases, using the first letter of the Greek word to represent the whole word.Chris Noble wrote:
Small things, not one-millionth things...
Well, I inferred it because he implied it, but we aren't exactly fighting about it. For more, see the first part of my response http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52000789 .GeorgianBay1939 wrote:
I don't think that he implied " that residents of the USA are backward". You inferred that. ...
Hmm. Being a long-time resident of Tucson, Arizona doesn't qualify me as a Texan, though I hasten to add that I have nothing but respect for Texans, in case anyone from my employer is watching... Before that, I was born and raised in Tennessee, a state that can claim much credit for the establishment and spirit of Texas (though I cannot, as I personally was elsewhere at the time).... decided that this might be the most efficient way to communicate with you two Texans...
45mm? Surely you meant a 1.77-inch Leica Elmarit, no?xpatUSA wrote:
...Totally OT, sorta, but I've just bought a 45mm Leica Elmarit for my GH1. Armed with that, I'll soon be able to perceive detail as small as 8.66mM on my watches, ho, ho. Oops, getting sarcastic now . . . I'll get my coat ;-)
is when I'll start using fancy charactersxpatUSA wrote:
The question is a little tongue-in-cheek. But, having done most of my Engineering work in metricated UK...
I'll bite. Why do photographers say a lens is 50mm when it should be 50 mm?LeeS wrote
Other pedants would be welcome to post their entries. A blue ribbon will be awarded to the most pedantic post.
Leehttp://photographicaLee.smugmug.com/
I may have a defective keyboard, but I seem to have a hard time finding the "μ" key.xpatUSA wrote:
The question is a little tongue-in-cheek. But, having done most of my Engineering work in metricated UK, I just find it a little odd. My suspicion is that the acronym started right here in the USA, a country noted for it's blatant disregard of metric units and a continuing fondness for units like "MMSCFD" in gas pipelines or "MFD" of capacitance where, in the one, M means one thousand and, in the other, M means one millionth.
I suppose any of the various derivations could be understood while in this forum.While realizing it's too late for μ4/3" or even u43 to be generally acceptable, one can but dream . . . ;-)
I don't think 99% of the people out there even know how to use archaic ascii codes to create something like "µ".Joel Halbert wrote:
I understand that this bothers you somewhat, but I don't think it should. I also like accuracy in units and abbreviations, and I have sometimes written "μ4/3". But to be perfectly correct about this, the official name of the system is:
"Micro Four Thirds"
and the logo that appears on all cameras and lenses has the word "MICRO" spelled out.
Therefore, I would say that MFT, M4/3 or just M43 are all perfectly accurate and sensible abbreviations, arguably more accurate than "μ4/3", and usually easier and faster to type.
In English, the prefix "micro" means "very small"; sure it comes from Greek, but most words come from some other language. One would not expect to see the shorthand forms "μscope", "μnesia" or "μeconomics" as being preferred forms, so why would one think that "μ4/3" is required? And I would say the "u43" is, if anything, less correct than "M43". The Greek letter "mu" or "μ" corresponds to the modern letter "m", not "u".
Finally, drawing an inference that residents of the USA are backward because they don't bother to write "μ", or because they haven't adopted the metric system in daily life, is inaccurate, unfair and unnecessarily elitist. You are obviously a thinking individual; I'd suggest you re-think this one.
--
JoelH
Barry Stewart wrote:
Option-m on a µac. What is it on a ∑indows machine? (Painful on an iPad or smart phone, with limited keys.)TrapperJohn wrote:
At least, on a US keyboard, µ is a pain to type.
Barry Stewart wrote:
Option-m on a µac. What is it on a ∑indows machine? (Painful on an iPad or smart phone, with limited keys.)TrapperJohn wrote:
At least, on a US keyboard, µ is a pain to type.
As 35mm frame size seems to be the standard, why didn't Olympus call it a "Quarter Frame" camera. Maybe then "QF" would be the name, and "SQF" for the what we now call Micro version, the S standing for Shorter registration distance.offtheback wrote:
If I remember correctly from the 4th grade,it should be M 1+1/3.Not too cumbersome,eh.