"MIRRORLESS" should NOT be in the description

[DaSonyGuy]

There's NO REASON to name a new technology by what's missing from it.

The new name should be indicative of what it is. Not what it isn't.

These are digital interchangeable lens cameras. However you want to work that together, I don't care.

Ahem...So what would you call cameras like the Sigma DP range, which dont have interchangable lenses?

Would you call them "Digital Fixed Focal Length Lens Cameras with Live View Electronic Viewfinders"?..."DFFLWLVEV"?
Hmmm...Does'nt exactly trip off the tongue!

BTW, I did'nt take part in the recent poll because I did'nt agree with any of the names suggested...The suggested names did'nt cover all the bases.

The term "EVIL" ("Electronic Viewfinder-Interchangable Lens") seems to have been widely accepted as a suitable name for compact digital cameras which have interchangable lens for at least a year now but obviously it cannot be used to describe the Sigma DP range. Thats fine as long another suitable term can be found for that purpose. "CDFL" ("Compact Digital-Fixed Lens") for instance.

But why should there be any need to change the term EVIL? Do you have a problem with this term? If so why?

And if a change is needed why not something more accurate such as "CDIL" ("Compact Digital-Interchangable lens)?

 

[goetz48]

And what are the SLTs (Sony A33 & A55)? They are not mirrorless, because they have a pellicle mirror that does not move and an EVF. Are they half-mirrorless or something different?

BTW: I think English ist the only language to call a radio 'wireless'.

 

[Vandyu]

I totally agree. I voted for DILC.
--
It is the 21st Century and I still prefer to read books on paper, not plastic.