Is photonet falling behind? [Mirrorless Cameras]

[joshroot]

<blockquote>

<p>Re: possible name, Josh, well, expand that MILC then, as in "Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera forum"?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Keep in mind that there are space limitations for names. Particularly in the drop down menus. That doesn't make a long name a dealbreaker. but it's something that has to be considered. Ideally, there should be a shorter version of whatever name we would use.</p>

[DickArnold]

I agree with Parv It encompasses the diversity in offerings surrounding the subject including some larger bodies as they may appear. I don't like acronyms particularly when I don't know what they mean. Josh, I share your concerns. There over eleven thousand NEX threads on that other site. Not posts but threads. What I am concerned about for PN as a grateful member is that this subculture of new and quite a few experienced photographers will not in the long run become attracted to PN. I truly do not know what to do about that. i also don't know if a mirrorless forum will attract many people on PN. I am really on your side.

[szrimaging]

<p>Mirrorless Cameras?</p>

<p>I think Samsung and Panasonic are under-represented in your current categories. It's a tough call, as Panasonic and Olympus probably belong in the same forum, but Sony, Samsung, and anyone else probably doesn't. Why not just change the Olympus to "Olympus and Panasonic", and then add a Samsung forum? Rather than "format" of the camera, I would think dividing by the ecosystem of the camera is a better idea.</p>

[parv]

While I am still here, some random thoughts ...

 

* a point-and-shoot camera, as currently generally understood, is also a mirrorless camera, with or without a optical or electronic viewfinder;

 

* "MILC forum" could|would attract the "knowledge seeker" initially by sheer curiosity (<;

 

* I personally prefer "MILC" over "EVIL camera" for the former is not only more compact but also includes EVILc; excludes SLR and includes non-SLR cameras without a viewfinder unlike the later.

[joshroot]

<p>To be clear, I'm not a fan of using either MILC or EVIL in the name of any PN forum. Neither are particularly well known, especially to non MILC/EVIL owners. Perhaps someday they will be as well known as SLR. But for now, they aren't.</p>

[Brad_]

In the near future they'll all just be "small cameras." A special name will be short-lived (and maybe even

amusing someday)...

[bobatkins]

<p>I'm not a fan of the idea of a "mirrorless interchangeable lens camera" forum (whatever you call it).</p>

<p>I don't see how it would equally address the issues and concerns of Pentax Q and Sony NEX users, nevermind Olympus Pen and Nikon 1 users and whatever Canon call their MILC.</p>

<p>There's no commonality between the cameras and little commonality about their operation and use. It would be like having a "DSLR" forum or a "Lens" forum. Too generic.</p>

<p>I can't see why the current manufacturer specific forums can't address any issues that come up, especially for Olympus and Sony users where there is lens compatibility between MILCs and DSLRs and so there will likely be questions of interest to both DSLR and MILC users. The Pentax Q will probably never have enough users to justify a forum of its own.</p>

<p>It's a pity that the sub-forum aspect of the photo.net forums isn't better used and promoted. The Sony/Minolta forum could easily add a "NEX" category, which is effectively a sub-forum which would be dedicated to NEX cameras. Similarly the Nikon forum could add a "Nikon 1" category.</p>

<p>However it would require that users be REQUIRED to choose a category when posting a thread. A few changes to the software would also make this a much more usable and useful option. </p>

<p>We have the tools to create homes for MILC users and their discussions, we just need to make better use of them.</p>

 

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<p>This thread got me to investigate this type of camera. Thanks for the heads up on this. Now I know I've been living in a cave. I just checked out PocketCinema video on YouTube of the APS-C size sensor of the MILC Sony NEX-5N low light movie samples.</p>

<p>Never realized digital imaging has improved to this level in the past 5 years especially on pocket cameras such as this type. The stereo sound is crisp and clear as well. A huge improvement at this price point. These camera's are looking to have it all for DSLR users, P&S'ers and amateur videographers. Didn't think it could be done.</p>

[phule]

<p>I'm also a fan of using the forums we already have. I don't see a need to create yet another one.</p>

<p>As an aside, if someone would like to buy me a mirrorless camera, I would be happy to start, and contribute to, numerous threads, wherever they reside! :)</p>

[leslie_cheung]

<p>Maybe a more pragmatic place is the already set digital camera forum...just add mirrorless into the description. Whether it grows or not, we'll see...Nothing wrong with being organic about is. I would also add a samsung sub category. No one knows the future but there's a<a href="http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0344780582/mirrorless-cameras-a-primer"> mirrorless primer</a> in the other big site. Steve Huff added a <a href="http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/12/12/mirrorless-central-a-new-hub-for-your-mirrorless-camera-fix/">mirrorless central</a> hub to his site while Thom Hogan created recently <a href="http://sansmirror.com">a second site</a> just for mirrorless.</p>

<p> </p>

[bobatkins]

<blockquote>

<p> ... the APS-C size sensor of the MILC Sony NEX-5N low light movie samples. Never realized digital imaging has improved to this level in the past 5 years especially on pocket cameras...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm not sure that I'd class the APS-C sensor MILCs as "pocket size" once you have a lens on them. Yes, they are smaller than a DSLR, but not much once you mate them up with most lenses. If I'm carrying a 24-70/2.8 or a 70-200/2.8 or an 85/1.4 I'm not saving much by using a MILC body.</p>

<p>Maybe with a small pancake prime they're small enough to be pocketable, but that's kind of limiting.</p>

<p>That's why I suspect that Canon will take the Nikon/Olympus route and go with a smaller sensor which will enable smaller lenses to be used making something that's much more pocketable. I don't see anything in it for Canon to make a MILC with an APS-C sensor which will compete with their DSLRs.</p>

 

[jcuknz]

<p>There is so little traffic on the Olympus forum that it is not worth splitting it IMO</p>

[luis_g]

<p>With the apparent popularity of these designs elsewhere, it doesn't matter a bit if the PN Pundits and Nobility don't like/use EVIL cams. The point is the users are out there, and from a marketing standpoint, there is <em>zero </em>visible on this site that would indicate to a precious new potential PN member that there's a place for them here.</p>

<p>Not to mention the er... never-ending gospel of DSLR superiority flashed in their face. Other sites are awakening to this and putting up obviously titled forums to attract people using or contemplating buying those cameras and lenses. And those people are going to have all the problems photographers have, use cameras for the same things that everyone uses cameras for, thus once here, the rest of the site will come into play and be helpful. Hell, some of them might even buy memberships and order stuff through the PN designated channels. Ignoring 15,000 threads elsewhere, the traffic involved, and content created seems silly to me. The fact that other sites are catering to that population overtly but not PN shows not unfriendliness but blinders and hermetic isolationism. I would think PN would want to grab as many of those users as possible, and put a flag down that says something to the effect of : " EVIL users welcome here."<br>

<br>

The fact that there's nothing to welcome them, and the usual wisdom from the usual suspects may have to do with why this topic barely has a pulse here while it throbs in other places. Plus a lot of the users of these cameras are young, which I would imagine PN would particularly want to attract.<br>

</p>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%">

<tbody>

<tr>

<td width="100%"></td>

<td></td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td><br /></td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[wogears]

<blockquote>

<p> The point is the users are out there, and from a marketing standpoint, there is <em>zero </em>visible on this site that would indicate to a precious new potential PN member that there's a place for them here.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>How about <em>photography</em>? Wouldn't that indicate that there is a place for photographers?</p>

[luis_g]

<p>Les, that might attract you but it's not bringing in the segment of the market we're talking about. Obviously, it hasn't worked, and shows zero chance of working in the future, to bring in EVIL users. Not to mention the advertisers who want to sell them stuff.</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>Bob answered a lot of the issues here, I will add my two cents as a long participant and moderator.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The fact that other sites are catering to that population overtly but not PN shows not unfriendliness but blinders and hermetic isolationism. I would think PN would want to grab as many of those users as possible, and put a flag down that says something to the effect of : " EVIL users welcome here."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This shows a complete misunderstanding of the value that photo.net expects to provide. While equipment threads are popular, there are a number of other factors at work. There is no "isolationism," there is a process, which says that when enough people post on a particular topic and it appears to need its own forum, we add it. We have a strong and vibrant community here -bringing in random users who want to chat all day about a specific camera type is not that useful. And there is no indication that they will be the ones that click on the ads.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The fact that there's nothing to welcome them</p>

</blockquote>

<p>We welcome photographers and people who want to be photographers. The Beginners Forum has been an incredible success, avoids the clubbiness of gearhead forums, and probably results in good click throughs on advertising and signs ups for subscriptions.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>How about <em>photography</em>? Wouldn't that indicate that there is a place for photographers?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Les makes a great point here. The No Words Forums have an incredible amount of activity, and it's just picture posting. The weekly picture threads on Nikon, Canon, Street, Leica and other forums are very, very popular. The articles we have get read. We aren't going to be just another gearhead forum.</p>

[Brad_]

I've never found information on these cameras lacking on pnet. Whenever a new one is announced,

there's always discussion on the Digital Camera forum. And then again when reviewed somewhere, with a lot of

comparative discussion, which is better, etc. Been that way for two or three years.

 

Why change something that works well?

[luis_g]

<p><strong>Jeff Spirer - "</strong>there is a process, which says that when enough people post on a particular topic and it appears to need its own forum, we add it."</p>

<p>It's not a new idea: "If (and when) they come, we'll build it." Reacting to, not creating, demand -- after it barges through the door. Nothing new there.</p>

<p>I clearly understand where Dick Arnold and others are coming from. The EVIL users aren't gearheads anymore than DSLR, LF, vintage, film iPhone or Leica users, <em>but just like them, they identify with what they use. </em>In fact, I clearly remarked that once they start using the cameras, they will encounter all the issues and splendors of photography, and they'll turn to the usual comments and questions, something this site does well, but they'll do it wherever they happen to be already. Only if they find that wanting will they go elsewhere.</p>

<p>Those of us who have made comments have done so with PN's best interests at heart. Reject, disregard, etc., but listen.</p>

<p>We'll see. It's a segment that in a few short years has grown to 40% of all interchangeable lens market cameras in Japan.</p>

<p><strong>Not unexpectedly, Brad chimed in with: "</strong>Why change something that works well?"</p>

<p>Indeed. It couldn't possibly work better could it?</p>

<p> </p>

[Brad_]

>>> Reacting to, not creating, demand -- after it barges through the door. Nothing new there.

 

Huh? Barges through the door? Again, the move to 4/3-type mirror-less cams has been happening for a couple

years and will continue. It is being served well, here - speaking as someone who has followed with great

interest and made recommendations and a purchase; ie first-hand experience. I don't think you

understand what the purpose of the discussion forums is.

 

As an aside, I am genuinely curious as to who the PN Pundits, Nobility, and usual suspects mentioned above

are. Is there a reason to not speak clearly?"

[luis_g]

<p>Sorry, double post.</p>

[joshroot]

<blockquote>

<p>Sorry, double post.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No Luis it wasn't. You just deleted what you wrote. But email notifications go out upon first submission.</p>

<p>And now that we're getting into the dregs of it with veiled personal insults. I'm closing this thread. I don't care what kind of camera you use, that sort of thing isn't okay.</p>