How to tell a rank amateur from a seasoned one, or a pro
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Winter is near
Next: CMOS sensors worthless for video?
From: Better Info on 8 Jul 2010 20:39 On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 19:44:38 -0400, "Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote: > >WITH MIRROR, John. It's not a "semantic debate" at all. A camera that >doesn't have a mirror behind the lens to reflect the image into the >viewfinder system is NOT a reflex camera. Words mean things, and "reflex" >means there's at least one mirror in there somewhere. > >> from rangefinder cameras, and it's quite reasonable to >> characterize EVF cameras as a kind of reflex cameras, > >That's utter nonsense. An EVF camera is not a reflex camera. 1re�flex \"re-'fleks\ noun [L reflexus, pp. of reflectere to reflect] (1508) ** 1 a : reflected heat, light, or color *** b : a mirrored image ** c : a copy exact in essential or peculiar features ** 2 a : an automatic and often inborn response to a stimulus that involves a nerve impulse passing inward from a receptor to a nerve center and thence outward to an effector (as a muscle or gland) without reaching the level of consciousness � compare habit ** b : the process that culminates in a reflex and comprises reception, transmission, and reaction � called also reflex action ** c pl : the power of acting or responding with adequate speed d : a way of thinking or behaving 3 : a linguistic element (as a word or sound) or system (as writing) that is derived from a prior and esp. an older element or system <boat is the reflex of Old English bat> 2reflex adjective [L reflexus] (1649) 1 : directed back on the mind or its operations : introspective ** 2 : bent, turned, or directed back : reflected <a stem with reflex leaves> ** 3 : produced or carried out in reaction, resistance, or return 4 of an angle : being between 180� and 360� ** 5 : of, relating to, or produced by a reflex without intervention of consciousness re�flex�ly adverb (C)1996 Zane Publishing, Inc. and Merriam-Webster, Incorporated. All rights reserved. ** = applies to a sensor signal reflexed to an LCD or EVF display
From: Chris Malcolm on 9 Jul 2010 01:49 Savageduck <savageduck1@{removespam}me.com> wrote: > On 2010-07-08 12:55:07 -0700, Chris Malcolm <cam(a)holyrood.ed.ac.uk> said: >> John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >>> On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 12:31:43 -0400, in >>> <seydnXXzTc7lYKjRnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, "Neil Harrington" >>> <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote: >>>> "Compact" I think is the best used for more or less pocketable cameras >>>> (Optio 750Z, Coolpix 5900, Powershot S80, etc.) while "ultracompact" should >>>> be reserved for those cameras that are really shirt-pocket size (Optio S4i, >>>> Coolpix S510 and thereabouts). >> >>> You need to broaden your horizons -- the FZ28 is easily pocketable in >>> the jackets I use for outdoor shooting. >> >> My shooting waistcoat has two big pockets each one of which can easily >> take a medium sized DSLR fitted with a 500mm reflex lens. > A pocketable 500mm !! ??? > Model? Specs? Weight? Inquiring minds need to know. Google 500mm reflex lens. These catadioptric mirror designs are very much smaller and lighter than the usual refractor lenses. But they're fixed aperture, and except for the Minolta/Sony model, manual focus. But being pocketable and light means you can easily carry one around just in case and easily use it hand held (with appropriately high shutter speeds). (Except that manually focusing a hand held 500mm is never going to be easy :-) -- Chris Malcolm Warning: none of the above is indisputable fact.
From: Chris Malcolm on 9 Jul 2010 01:52 nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: > In article <7p5c36tcvs50bg11vumc1dpr3as3f5eha5(a)4ax.com>, John Navas > <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >> >Superzoom and compact are terms I would quite happily use, while retaining >> >the generic term P&S to cover both. ... >> >> We wouldn't want to miss an opportunity for pejorative bashing, now >> would we. You must be terribly insecure and threatened. > so why do you keep bashing people? language evolves. p&s doesn't mean > what you want it to mean. deal with it. Language evolves as a result of the usage decisions of individual language users. Discerning language users encourage useful logical evolution, and discourage popular but illogical evolution. -- Chris Malcolm Warning: none of the above is indisputable fact.
From: David J Taylor on 9 Jul 2010 02:30 "John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:7p5c36tcvs50bg11vumc1dpr3as3f5eha5(a)4ax.com... [] >>Superzoom and compact are terms I would quite happily use, while >>retaining >>the generic term P&S to cover both. ... > > We wouldn't want to miss an opportunity for pejorative bashing, now > would we. You must be terribly insecure and threatened. > > -- > John Take Amazon - they have a category: Electronics & Photo, Photography, Digital Cameras, Point & Shoot Digital Cameras where the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ38EB-K Digital Camera is listed.
From: David J Taylor on 9 Jul 2010 02:38
"Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote in message news:3_GdnXPIqddQ-avRnZ2dnUVZ_jGdnZ2d(a)giganews.com... [] > "Pocket camera" is fine with me. I don't think there's necessarily just > *one* correct term for any of these camera styles. But I still balk at > "P&S" because that term was coined to describe a rather specific kind of > 35mm camera, which the cameras we are talking about are not really > proper examples of (regardless of whether they're film or digital). > > I have previously mentioned that I do have a digital camera that's > reasonable to call P&S -- my very first digital camera, an Agfa CL-30. > That really is the digital equivalent of the 35mm P&S cameras of > yesteryear. There certainly isn't /one/ term, but the half-dozen or more which SMS was suggesting is, I feel, too many for general use. P&S is now so widely used a term that I feel we should go with the way that our language has evolved. Amazon have a Point and Shoot category, for example. Doubtless there may still be some who use "automobile" rather than "car" (although I accept this isn't the same evolution). Cheers, David |