XPost: rec.photo.digital 
 From: alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca 
  
 Lionel wrote: 
  
 > Kibo informs me that Woodchuck Bill  stated that: 
 > 
 > 
 >>Lionel  wrote in 
 >>news:g9koj0lp6dlredbc1leurtj63qek5ski7v@4ax.com: 
 >> 
 >> 
 >>>What, like the Canon G3, for example? That's a digital camera with 
 >>>interchangeable lenses, but I don't think too many people would describe 
 >>>it as a digital SLR. 
 >> 
 >>The lens does not come off on a G3. 
 > 
 > 
 > No, but you can attach various lenses to one, & many people will see 
 > that as being 'interchangable', & IMO, it's just a another example of 
 > how the fuzziness of the scope in the charter will cause confusion & 
 > friction. 
  
 Adding a lens element is NOT interchangeable. Degrading a lens by 
 such artifice is anathema to the whole point of interchangeable 
 lenses. 
  
 >  Nobody involved in writing the RFD has yet explained why they think it 
 > would be a bad thing to just make the scope of the proposed group 
 > *exactly* equivalent to the name of the group, thereby eliminating these 
 > sorts of problems. 
  
 See my other posts today on that subject.  The name doesn't have 
 to be perfectly logical ... the use of the group should be wise, 
 however. 
  
 Cheers, 
 Alan. 
  
 -- 
 -- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource: 
 -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm 
 -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.-- 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)