Moreover, you could have something like a Mamiya C330 which is a ILC, but not an SLR , does use a mirror for the finding lens but not for the taking lens .
Any of the old large format cameras could arguably be mirrorless too .
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
What is mirrorless?
- Thread starter nuke12
- Start date
Any of the old large format cameras could arguably be mirrorless too .
TN Args
Forum Pro
None of those existed when I liked the term (in the early days when I actually thought the question was open. I haven't thought it is open for many years). As I have already said, I like Mirrorless / MILC today.
It will be a mirrorless camera or MILC.
TN Args
Forum Pro
It is something to reflect upon.
Mike CH
Veteran Member
First, technically, ‘mirrorless’ can be taken to mean anything that doesn’t use a mirror. As somebody else remarked, calling something by the absence of an attribute is not always a good idea. Or should SLRs really be called ‘only-one-lens-reflex’ cameras? Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. The main problem is that it is often too broad. A category of cameras that contains both smartphones and A7 isn’t of much use.
Second, perhaps due to editorial use, ‘mirrorless’ has entered common usage as a short form of ‘mirrorless interchangable lens camera’. MILC just didn’t ever gain as much traction as SLR and DSLR did. While not technically correct, it’s a much more useful category than the first.
But those two points aren’t really the main reason why the meaning of ‘mirrorless’ as a category can leads to such contentions:
Third, ‘mirrorless’ has, in certain circumstances, taken on an aura of photographic nirvana and bliss, that towards all - both brands and users - must strive. Those who don’t quite agree with this position sometimes like to point that ‘mirrorless’ also includes smartphones (first meaning) and that can of course seem quite offensive to other people.
Fourth, ‘mirrorless’ sometimes seems to mean ‘a Sony’ or ‘a copy of a Sony by another brand’. M43 users seem to quite happy to refer to their cameras as ‘m43’, and the Nikon and Canon mirrorless offerings are met with disdain as not being ‘true’ mirrorless.
This fourth meaning seems to occur mostly in the intersection of meanings two and three.
Regards, Mike
--
Wait and see...
I hardly ever speak for anybody but myself. In the cases where I do mean to speak generally the statements are likely to be marked as such.
Second, perhaps due to editorial use, ‘mirrorless’ has entered common usage as a short form of ‘mirrorless interchangable lens camera’. MILC just didn’t ever gain as much traction as SLR and DSLR did. While not technically correct, it’s a much more useful category than the first.
But those two points aren’t really the main reason why the meaning of ‘mirrorless’ as a category can leads to such contentions:
Third, ‘mirrorless’ has, in certain circumstances, taken on an aura of photographic nirvana and bliss, that towards all - both brands and users - must strive. Those who don’t quite agree with this position sometimes like to point that ‘mirrorless’ also includes smartphones (first meaning) and that can of course seem quite offensive to other people.
Fourth, ‘mirrorless’ sometimes seems to mean ‘a Sony’ or ‘a copy of a Sony by another brand’. M43 users seem to quite happy to refer to their cameras as ‘m43’, and the Nikon and Canon mirrorless offerings are met with disdain as not being ‘true’ mirrorless.
This fourth meaning seems to occur mostly in the intersection of meanings two and three.
Regards, Mike
--
Wait and see...
I hardly ever speak for anybody but myself. In the cases where I do mean to speak generally the statements are likely to be marked as such.
Last edited:
Mike CH
Veteran Member
A topic that would be more appropriate for another type of forum?
At least, that’s what I would call it...
Regards, Mike
TN Args
Forum Pro
Technically, you should have written pedantically where you wrote technically, above. And although I made a technical correction, it was pedantic of me to do so. However, I felt that I was joining in the spirit of your post.
Not always, but not never either. So, it may or may not be a good idea.
Should? Are you sure that is the word you meant? Did you intend to assign a moral impertative? Or did you mean could?
Fortunately, it doesn't. Unless you mis-define the term, like defining 'raincoat' to include scuba gear, because it keeps the rain out.
Mike CH
Veteran Member
No. Both technically, linguistically and logically ‘mirrorless’ can be used to describe anything without a mirror. No pedantry involved.
Yes. Pedantry also comes into play, e.g. when somebody insists that a technical interpretation of a word is the only meaningful interpretation, all the while ignoring a common usage.
Maybe?
I am not sure what your point is?
I thought I made a pretty good case that the purely technical and linguistic meaning of the word ‘mirrorless’ is less helpful in this case?
Regards, Mike
Don't worry, I'm sure you'll manage to find a job soon ;-)In the good old day, there is only film camera. You have to see what you wanna shoot through some optics.
Then the digital age is born. Now one could see not just through the optics, but from the electronic display which the sensor streams out.
In this very first day, we have only dSLR, dRF (leica&canon), dCompact, dBridge.That's all.Oouch forget phone camrra
Then the 4/3 boys think .. heh, what the use of that clumsy mirror in our high end interchangable lens (-dSLR-) camera? Let throw the mirror away from our design board, and call this next generation camera "mirrorless".
The rest is history .. that no one care.
...
Then some gurus somewhere start toignite the flame warexpress their wisdom .
""
Heh, the compact/bridge/rf/slt camera also has no mirror inside! Why don't we call it mirrorless too .. to complete the 'mirrorless' definition?
""
..
Debate is fun. Flame war is more fun for gurus who have no job.
khunpapa
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,678
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 1,299
khunpapa
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,678
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 1,299
Impossible.
I used to have cash. Then Johnny Cash dead.
I still had hope. Then Mr.Bob Hope dead.
Now you think I can find job soon even we have no more SJ but his iPhone camera is threatening my cameta?
--
Flashes of my Memory.
Last edited:
Tom_N
Forum Pro
DSLRs are not niche cameras within the digital system camera category. That distinction would belong to MILCs.
Martin.au
Forum Pro
I'll do you one better! Why is mirrorless!!!
Bob Janes
Veteran Member
It is a Venn diagram. Mirrorless is one set that overlaps with interchangable lenses. The Fuji x100 is mirrorless as was the Sony R1. My Contraflex is an SLR, despite having a fixed lens. The Olympus E10 was an SLR despite not having an interchangable lens or a moving mirror.
Mirrorless has come to be a term because people were so used to a reflex mirror on that class of camera that it's absence was the distinctive thing. The term mirrorless does not fit for rangefinder cameras ( itself a bad term as lots of AF and reflex cameras also use a rangefinder), or the Sony SLT cameras that use a mirror/beam splitter for focus only rather than viewing..
Probably a better term would be view camera (or even digital view camera), but that ship has sailed as that is not the way English works... In English usage defines terms, hence decimate no longer means to reduce by one tenth... and mirrorless is where you compose on an electronic screen...
Mirrorless has come to be a term because people were so used to a reflex mirror on that class of camera that it's absence was the distinctive thing. The term mirrorless does not fit for rangefinder cameras ( itself a bad term as lots of AF and reflex cameras also use a rangefinder), or the Sony SLT cameras that use a mirror/beam splitter for focus only rather than viewing..
Probably a better term would be view camera (or even digital view camera), but that ship has sailed as that is not the way English works... In English usage defines terms, hence decimate no longer means to reduce by one tenth... and mirrorless is where you compose on an electronic screen...
Fogel70
Senior Member
All ILCs are niche cameras today. It's basically only smartphones that are mainstream cameras in today's camera market.
tbcass
Forum Pro
True. That's the way it was in the old days of film and the way it should be. I'm glad that the people less serious about photography are using cell phones.
New Day Rising
Veteran Member
The DPR editorial position is crystal clear.
As users of the forums we are, of course, not bound by the official DPR terminology. But given these forums are on DPR it doesn't make sense to adopt different terminology that will only cause confusion - as it already has.
--
Happiness lies in thinking or doing that which one considers beautiful - HIK
Last edited:
john Clinch
Senior Member
I think that what is really amazing is how good and committed many phone photographers are
I have a colleague who teaches photography and nearly made it as pro. Her Instagram is 100% phone and just shows her daughters growing up. But they are great photos
donaldsc
Senior Member
Mirror less - without a mirror.
Julio.
Well-known member
I see mirrorless cameras as CAMCORDERS.
mamallama
Forum Pro
Now the question is "what's a camcorder"? Is my iPhone a camcorder? It certainly can take video.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum