what is ZLR?

A ZLR is, broadly-speaking, an SLR-like camera without an interchangeable
lens. You might think of it as a high-end point and shoot camera,
offering full manual control of zoom, aperture, shutter speed and focus,
and having a hot-shoe for flash. It would look like an SLR camera (that's
vague, isn't it!).

David
 >> Stay informed about: what is ZLR? 

 > [WD me:]
 > I've never come across the term Zlr.

This term (standing for "Zoom Lens Reflex") is how a film SLR with a
not-interchangeable zoom lens are traditionally called. An example is the
Olympus IS-200.

Some people improperly wished to apply this same designation to EVFs,
which are digital cameras with an EVF. However, EVFs are simply not reflex
cameras, and thus calling them a "ZLR" is just inadequate. And the stolen
usage is also equivocal, as this term traditionally refers to other kind
of cameras.

Proponents of the term "ZLR" instead of the appropriate designation "EVF"
are always unable to define what is supposed to be a ZLR. They usually say
vague things such as "broadly speaking...", "you might think of it as...",
"it would look like a SLR-camera...", and so forth. They want to define an
EVF without reference to its definig characteristic, the EVF.

In contrast, if you want a definition of an EVF, it is simple: it is a
digital camera with a EVF, period. And this includes everything those
people wanted to designate with the term "ZLR", and nothing beyond just
that.

The only likely explanation for the misnaming is a commercial trick trying
to induce the naïve to believe that they are buying something which is
"almost a SLR" or some special type of SLR. And it is just funny that some
EVF users happily feed this kind of marketing deception!

Julio.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: what is ZLR? 

Hi David, you say,

 > A ZLR is, broadly-speaking, an SLR-like camera without an
 > interchangeable lens.

This is funny! How could a camera be SLR-like? For instance, a rangefinder
is much more like a SLR than a EVF, because it has an optical viewfinder,
and thus according to your criteria it should be a "ZLR".

 > You might think of it as a high-end point and shoot camera,

Since many EVFs have full manual controls they could hardly be called
"point and shoot". And since many digital rangefinders and even advanced
DSLRs do offer point-and-shoot auto settings, they should definitely be
included in what you call a "ZLR".

 > offering full manual control of zoom,

Have you ever heard of a zoom without manual control?

 > aperture, shutter speed and focus,

Several so-called "ZLRs" lack one or more of such controls. HP850 and
Kodak DX6490 are instances.

 > and having a hot-shoe for flash.

Most so-called "ZLRs" have no hot-shoe for flash. Panasonic FZ-15 for one.
Also Canon S1 IS, Panasonic FZ3, Kodaks, several Olympus, Fujis, and so
forth. Actually having a hot shoe is an exception among so-called "ZLRs".

 > It would look like an SLR camera (that's vague, isn't it!).

The new Olympus E-300 Evolt does not like like a SLR at all. Neither do
the HPs 850 & 945 or the Olympus UZ-750, 765, 770 etc.

Not only vague or impressionistic, it is wrong, a misleading misnaming, a
seller talk, unworthy naming a group of at least tentatively
discriminating users.

The best!

Julio.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: what is ZLR? 

J.S.Pitanga wrote:
 > Hi David, you say,
 >
  >> A ZLR is, broadly-speaking, an SLR-like camera without an
  >> interchangeable lens.
 >
 > This is funny! How could a camera be SLR-like? For instance, a
 > rangefinder is much more like a SLR than a EVF, because it has an
 > optical viewfinder, and thus according to your criteria it should be
 > a "ZLR".

SLR-like in appearance an form factor.

  >> You might think of it as a high-end point and shoot camera,
 >
 > Since many EVFs have full manual controls they could hardly be called
 > "point and shoot". And since many digital rangefinders and even
 > advanced DSLRs do offer point-and-shoot auto settings, they should
 > definitely be included in what you call a "ZLR".

Rangefinder cameras have their own newsgroup.

  >> offering full manual control of zoom,
 >
 > Have you ever heard of a zoom without manual control?

e.g. zooms with only two settings.

  >> aperture, shutter speed and focus,
 >
 > Several so-called "ZLRs" lack one or more of such controls. HP850 and
 > Kodak DX6490 are instances.

If they lack such controls, they do not qualify for this newsgroup.

  >> and having a hot-shoe for flash.
 >
 > Most so-called "ZLRs" have no hot-shoe for flash. Panasonic FZ-15 for
 > one. Also Canon S1 IS, Panasonic FZ3, Kodaks, several Olympus, Fujis,
 > and so forth. Actually having a hot shoe is an exception among
 > so-called "ZLRs".
  >> It would look like an SLR camera (that's vague, isn't it!).
 >
 > The new Olympus E-300 Evolt does not like like a SLR at all. Neither
 > do the HPs 850 & 945 or the Olympus UZ-750, 765, 770 etc.

The E-300 has interchangeable lenses, and therefore belongs in the
SLR-systems group. I can't comment on the others.

 > Not only vague or impressionistic, it is wrong, a misleading
 > misnaming, a seller talk, unworthy naming a group of at least
 > tentatively discriminating users.
 >
 > The best!
 >
 > Julio.

Julio, we had this discussion when naming the newsgroup - ZLR was the best
option that anyone came up with. I don't think that anyone was completely
happy with the name. The group does not deal with low-end point and
shoot, digital rangefinders or slr-systems.

Let's put our effort into helping people with their ZLR questions and
answers.

David<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: what is ZLR? 

"J.S.Pitanga" <jspitanga.TakeThisOut@fastimap.com> wrote in message
news:opskgaiipalw3qwu@jsp-zynclw9smfc.ajato.com.br...
  >> [WD me:]
  >> I've never come across the term Zlr.
 >
 > This term (standing for "Zoom Lens Reflex") is how a film SLR with a
 > not-interchangeable zoom lens are traditionally called. An example is the
 > Olympus IS-200.

Funny thing is, this camera is often listed as an SLR (I assume you are
referring to the IS-20).

 > Some people improperly wished to apply this same designation to EVFs,
 > which are digital cameras with an EVF. However, EVFs are simply not reflex
 > cameras, and thus calling them a "ZLR" is just inadequate. And the stolen
 > usage is also equivocal, as this term traditionally refers to other kind
 > of cameras.

This seems to be accurate.

 > Proponents of the term "ZLR" instead of the appropriate designation "EVF"
 > are always unable to define what is supposed to be a ZLR. They usually say
 > vague things such as "broadly speaking...", "you might think of it as...",
 > "it would look like a SLR-camera...", and so forth. They want to define an
 > EVF without reference to its definig characteristic, the EVF.

Also accurate.

 > In contrast, if you want a definition of an EVF, it is simple: it is a
 > digital camera with a EVF, period. And this includes everything those
 > people wanted to designate with the term "ZLR", and nothing beyond just
 > that.

Call a bear a "bear."

 > The only likely explanation for the misnaming is a commercial trick trying
 > to induce the naïve to believe that they are buying something which is
 > "almost a SLR" or some special type of SLR. And it is just funny that some
 > EVF users happily feed this kind of marketing deception!

That's what I thought. This newsgroup has a fundamental flaw and should be
renamed. Just my two cents!<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: what is ZLR? 

Hi David, you say,

 > SLR-like in appearance an form factor.

Many fake and toy cameras look like a SLR. The Nikon CP8400, which you
discuss all the time in this group (and thus is supposedly a ZLR for you)
lacks a SLR appearance.

 > Rangefinder cameras have their own newsgroup.

But according to your own criteria they could be discussed in this group,
because they thoroughly fit your description of a "ZLR" (and even look
like a SLR such as the Olympus EVolt).

  >> [Julio:]
  >> Have you ever heard of a zoom without manual control?

 > [David:]
 > e.g. zooms with only two settings.

Do you mean that this control is not manual?

 > If they lack such controls, they do not qualify for this newsgroup.

Rather than discussing what qualifies for this newsgroup (which is a
subject newly introduced by you), I simply discussing how and why EVFs are
misnamed "ZLRs", this being the subject of the present thread: "What is
ZLR".

Anyway, usually a group is created to fit a category of cameras, but this
is the first time I see a category of cameras being created to fit a group!

Besides, many cameras lacking SLR appearance, or lacking hot shoe, or
lacking full aperture, shutter or focus controls are, although commonly
named ZLRs, but if they cannot be discussed in this group, this group
itself is misnamed.

So weird is your criteria that a Panasonic FZ-15 or a Canon S1-IS and most
so-called ZLRs could not be discussed in this group, just because they
lack a hot-shoe, and neither could some Olympus UZ and even the Nikon
Coolpix 8400 (which you discuss here all the time), just because they lack
a SLR appearance.

 > The E-300 has interchangeable lenses, and therefore
 > belongs in the SLR-systems group.

If so, according to your criteria, rangefinders which look like the SLR
E-300 should be called ZLRs (and thus belong in this group, if this is
what you want to discuss).

 > The group does not deal with low-end point and
 > shoot, digital rangefinders or slr-systems.

This group is supposed to deal with "ZLRs". However, not only "ZLR" is
itself an unfortunate misnaming for EVFs (which is the subject of the
present discussion), but also you want to redefine what is already
misnamed as ZLRs to fit a newly invented vague, impressionistic and
self-contradictory category.

 > Let's put our effort into helping people with their
 > ZLR questions and answers.

This you can hardly do, for as long as you cannot even tell what you think
is a ZLR without so many self-contradictions, and even without
contradicting what is ordinarily conceived as a ZLR. The result is that
rather than dealing with a category of cameras, this group is bound to
deal with the perplexities of such a misleading misnaming!

The best!

Julio.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: what is ZLR? 

 > [Julio:]
 > Besides, many cameras lacking SLR appearance, or lacking hot shoe, or
 > lacking full aperture, shutter or focus controls are, although commonly
 > named ZLRs, but if they cannot be discussed in this group, this group
 > itself is misnamed.

Just correcting:

Besides, many cameras lacking SLR appearance, or lacking hot shoe, or
lacking full aperture, shutter or focus controls are, although
*mistakenly,*
named ZLRs, but if they cannot be discussed in this group, this group
itself is misnamed.

Julio.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: what is ZLR? 

Hi Charles,

 > Funny thing is, this camera is often listed as an SLR
 > (I assume you are referring to the IS-20).

I think that the IS-20 and the IS-200 are just two similarly specified
Olympus ZLRs. Also, I understand that ZLR is just a subcategory of SLR,
characterized by a non-interchangeable zoom lens. Therefore, it is natural
that they are listed as SLRs.

Whatever is a single lens reflex is aptly named a SLR, and so are ZLRs.
Meanwhile, whatever is not a reflex camera is mistakenly and misleadingly
named a ZLR, and this is the case with all these EVFs which are the
subject of the present group, whence your accurate conclusion:

 > This newsgroup has a fundamental flaw and should be renamed.

The best,

Julio.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: what is ZLR? 

"J.S.Pitanga" <jspitanga RemoveThis @fastimap.com> wrote in message
news:opskglm4gvlw3qwu@jsp-zynclw9smfc.ajato.com.br...
 > Hi Charles,
 >
 >
 > Whatever is a single lens reflex is aptly named a SLR, and so are
 > ZLRs. Meanwhile, whatever is not a reflex camera is mistakenly and
 > misleadingly named a ZLR, and this is the case with all these EVFs
 > which are the subject of the present group, whence your accurate
 > conclusion:
 >
  >> This newsgroup has a fundamental flaw and should be renamed.
 >

What one might call the Humpty Dumpty effect is often in play
especially here:

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone,
"it means just
what I choose it to mean-neither more nor less." Lewis Carrol.

Technically, "reflex" presumably should refer to a reflection process
and thus only cameras that use a mirror are reflexes. A so-called ZLR
is rightly called an "electronic viewfinder camera" and, IMHO, they
are the wave of the future but not the present day. A great deal of
fighting and discussion produced the present additions to
rec.photo.digital and I suspect their acceptance may have been caused
by battle fatigue! The original proponents wanted to include
non-reflex digital cameras like Leicas in a "digital single lens
reflex" discussion group. OK, if you accept Humpty Dumpty's
definition!


--
James V. Silverton
Potomac, Maryland, USA<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: what is ZLR? 

J.S.Pitanga <jspitanga.TakeThisOut@fastimap.com> wrote:
 > Anyway, usually a group is created to fit a category of cameras, but this
 > is the first time I see a category of cameras being created to fit a group!
 >

Are you bored with trolling this group yet?

pete
--
pete.TakeThisOut@fenelon.com "there's no room for enigmas in built-up areas"<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: what is ZLR? 

  >> [Julio:]Anyway, usually a group is created to fit a category
  >> of cameras, but this is the first time I see a category
  >> of cameras being created to fit a group!

 > [Pete:]
 > Are you bored with trolling this group yet?

The mark of an imbecile is to feel trolled by any comment.

Julio.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: what is ZLR? 

"Greg Evans" <misterx.DeleteThis@larkbooks.com> writes:

 > Charles Schuler wrote:
 >
  > > This "digital ZSR" issue is so darned confusing that it can
  > > only lead to more chaos. How many more posts like the one submitted
  > > by the OP do you see coming? I see enough to make this forum always
  > > on the defensive and to continuously compel supporters/founders to
  > > contrive justifications. Not a great scenerio!
 >
 > Which is why I see little point in fragmenting the rec.photo.digital
 > group in the first place; it seems to have served a small group of
 > fussy pigeonholing gearheads rather than the photographic community in
 > general. Unfortunately I wasn't around to cast my vote at the time.
 > But I've had my say now, so I'll just ignore the "what is a ZLR?"
 > threads, with all their silly haranguing, backbiting, and nitpicking,
 > and get on with learning how to use whatever this contraption is I'm
 > holding to artistic effect....

I thought the zlr group was a ridiculous idea, but I now see the
benefits in confining the users of them to this little ghetto. Even
the point and shoot people are probably glad to see the
point-and-shoot-with-pretensions (ie ZLR) people gone.

Everyone wins.

B><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: what is ZLR? 

"J.S.Pitanga" <jspitanga DeleteThis @fastimap.com> writes:

  > > [Bruce Murphy:]I thought the zlr group was a ridiculous idea,
  > > but I now see the benefits in confining the users
  > > of them to this little ghetto. Even the point and
  > > shoot people are probably glad to see the
  > > point-and-shoot-with-pretensions (ie ZLR) people
  > > gone.
 >
 > Many dSLR users also have one or more EVFs for those occasions
 > requiring more portability and less performance.

What do you base this on? Fond hope? Recall that I'm speaking of the
people who demand the term ZLR, not people who happen to use a digital
camera that doesn't fit into the SLR category (whatever that is)

 > Many point-and-shoot
 > photographers also use EVFs because of their usually longer
 > zooms. The belief that people are classified according to the gear
 > they have is the mark of the gear imbecile.

As I've pointed out, the so-called ZLRs and digital point and shoots
are indistinguishable. What distinguishes the users is whether they're
insecure enough to need to invent terms like ZLR so they can pretend
to be better than other people using point and shoot digital cameras.

  > > Everyone wins.
 >
 > Even you have just won an adequate description.

I wonder what this is supposed to mean.

B><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: what is ZLR?