What’s in a name?

So will mirrorless always be mirrorless. It’s a negative term that denotes a comparison that may some day be irrelevant. Is there a better word to describe the direction we are heading. More over if we coin a new term, will we get to be in Wikipedia?

We still use the word 'wireless', but it used to mean radio. ;-) Then there's cordless phones, power tools, etc. The other name for mirrorless cameras is 'compact system camera' or CSC. I like that term, personally. But not all of them are compact, although they are usually more compact than the reflex cameras that they replace.

In my opinion this whole category is out of date, since Canon, Nikon, Olympus, and Sony all have mirrorless cameras and these forums already exist and have existed for years on PN. I think the mirrorless category is now past it and posts could/should be directed to the brand forums, and this one deleted. I also have never thought that mirrorless cameras are so radically different that they needed a special category anyway, but that is a slightly different issue.

Camera are cameras are cameras . . . What's the difference between an 11x14 Dearforf and D4? This is a PHOTOGRAPHY site! Why do I can what tools you used to make your image?

The term, MILC, will be appropriate to distinguish these cameras from SLRs and DSLRs, as long as the latter are common. The difference is more fundamental than, say, "field camera" vs "view camera."

Ed Farmar: I agree with you, but given the brand forums have been running pretty well since the beginning of PN it would seem sensible to keep them running, and people do love their brands...I think suggesting that MILCs are somehow radically different from other digital ILCs seems unwarranted to me. I'm a lumper rather than a splitter in this regard.

Ed Farmar: I agree with you, but given the brand forums have been running pretty well since the beginning of PN it would seem sensible to keep them running, and people do love their brands...I think suggesting that MILCs are somehow radically different from other digital ILCs seems unwarranted to me. I'm a lumper rather than a splitter in this regard.

 

Yes . . . I took it, slightly, to extreme, for effect . . . The manufacturer forums make sense in that it simplifies things if I need help with the controls on a Nikon camera. But, a forum, or thread, for posting images created with Nikon cameras makes no sense to me . . .

It is a bit silly. Every other digital camera that isn't a DSLR is technically mirrorless. We don't call 'em mirrorless compact, mirrorless bridge or mirrorless .... whatever. Same as we never called non-SLR film cameras 'mirrorless'.

 

I suppose it's just slightly more succinct than saying 'High-end interchangeable lens digital camera that uses direct sensor viewing via an electronic viewfinder'. :cool:

Yes . . . I don't remember the advertising for my Zone VI 4x5 field camera including the term "mirrorless" but I'm pretty sure that the camera doesn't have a mirror. I'll have to check when I get home.

 

You're right . . . P&S don't have mirrors . . . Perhaps the term should just be Single Lens, non-Reflex . . .

Why do I can what tools you used to make your image?

Precisely because this is a photography site. You answered your own question. ;-) This isn't Instagram - although even there, I'll more likely follow someone if they're using a particular kind of camera, as that makes the account more interesting.

 

I suppose we could call them live view cameras. Or not...

Except most DSLRs these days are also Live View cameras.

 

With mirrorless 35mm film cameras, we usually break them down into two groups: P&S or Rangefinder. So with 35mm cameras, P&S, Rangefinder, and SLR are sufficient descriptors. But with digital cameras we still have P&S, so there's no reason why they still can't be called P&S. And there are digital interchangeable lens rangefinders, so there is no reason why they still can't be called Rangefinders, the way I see it (although they and the P&S cameras usually also have Live VIew, which, admittedly, clouds the issue). But when you get to interchangeable lens cameras in which you're viewing an image primarily through the lens, then these are fundamentally still IL TTL cameras. They just don't use mirrors.So what is a good descriptor? Personally, I favor the acronym MILC, but MSLC or DMSLC (digital mirrorless single lens camera) also work. MILTTLC is just too long and DMILTTLC is even worse. If we choose to overlook whether or not the lens is interchangeable, then we can have MTTLCs, or simply MCs or DMCs. And, hey, we can Run our DMCs and be cool . . . if you like hip-hop, that is.

Edited July 31, 2019 by mwmcbroom

The french call them 'hybride', which is just plain confusing, as the term was also used to describe 'bridge' cameras, where it made a lot more sense. Result being that mirrorless cameras are seen as inferior to a 'reflex'.

Keep in mind . . . "reflex" has nothing to do with either the TTL aspect or the mirror . . . Reflex refers to the prism used to allow the viewed image to be properly oriented in the viewfinder instead of upside down and backwards. Mirrorless cameras perform this action electronically . . .

A TLR is a "reflex" without a prism, as are standard versions of Hasselblad cameras, and optional finders on Nikon SLRs up to the F3 (maybe later). It's the mirror, not the prism.

 

Mirrorless cameras include a wide variety, including rangefinder and view cameras. It is fitting that the latter have forums and followers of their own, and predate what we call MILCs by many decades. We seldom see Leica and large format enthusiasts dipping their toes into the mirrorless pool.

Hah! I always think of milk. Guess I'm too pedestrian.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

__________________________

 

* Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Fotoapparatus

Just call them EVILC - or EVIL for short:eek:

Frankly, I rather go with MILC then:rolleyes:. Maybe at some point, people with use the acronym and forget what it stands for (ZIP code anyone?)

EVC (electronic viewfinder cameras) could do it - but it doesn't distinguish between fixed and interchangeable lens ones.

Maybe call if mirrorfree?

 

Mirrorless will stick - the same way cordless (drill), paperless (office), wireless (internet), clipless (pedal), strapless (bra) or the seedless (grape, watermelon) do. Maybe eventually it will go the way of the horseless carriage?

 

If the term mirrorless is worth debating - maybe we should have a good look at "full frame" and "crop". "Crop" as in less than "full"? DX as "two-thirds full"? m4/3 as "half-full"? "CX (1") as "third-full"? "Medium" (format) and "large" (format) as "fuller" and "fullest"? Or maybe "more full" and "most full"?

 

Call 'em DSLM instead of MILC?

BTW, how many DTLRs are there?

So why are we calling them DSLR?

Edited August 11, 2019 by Dieter Schaefer

So, DILR then? (Digital Interchangeable Lens Reflex) That'll work for digital cameras with a mirror, but somehow I don't think DILR will replace DSLR any time soon. The latter has the weight of familiarity on its side, even if it is rather redundant.

 

Another acronym for a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera could be DILM or perhaps just ILM.

It may not be a "good thing" but Ludmilla and I tend to see things the same way, sometimes.

 

Every time is see MILC, I always think aboot MILF

Ever since Ludmilla's post, so have I. But I''m not thinking about a Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Fotoapparatus. It's distracting.

ICD's (image capturing devices) This applies to your 4x5, your phone and your digital camera. All other terms tend to separate us from each other.

I thought that a Mirrorless camera, is a camera without a mirror, since it is less a mirror, or minus a mirror. It has no mirror, which makes it mirrorless. Why? Because there have been a hundred threads by photographers whining over the weight, noise and slap from DSLRs. Now we have no mirror. All is good.

Pic16Bit