Hi Benjamin. A quick check on you-know-where suggests you're quite right. I recall going through this a while ago (QRB vs QBM). Maybe I ended up with the wrong conclusion (not like that hasn't happened before). Let me check some stuff when I get home from Bulgaria, on Friday. If I can't find anything solid in favour of QRB, I'll change it here and in Lens$db. Thanks for noticing.
mpmendenhall wrote:
I've been traveling and haven't had much time the past few days to update the top post, but I will try to incorporate some of the suggestions into it by this evening.
So far as the direction that the Alt FAQ might eventually go as it accumulates additional information: one could imagine presenting alt-related stuff on a new website, or perhaps even an Alt Gear/Lenses Wiki. However, I think that there are some unique attributes to the discussion forum approach that could work very well for this type of material. Considering the possibilities for how to organize alt lens information:
- A website can certainly provide a very clear and well-organized approach to the subject matter; indeed, there are already many excellent alt-lens-oriented sites already out there (a great example of this type of approach is the mir.com.my Zuiko information site, a very comprehensive site on Olympus Zuiko lenses). However, an individually or small-group maintained website is a lot of work for the maintainers, and creates a barrier to quickly adding new contributions from outside people.
- A Wiki site somewhat reduces the work load on the core maintainer(s) and allows more people to contribute. However, there is still the large maintainers' problem of controlling/deciding how much access others have to editing pages, and various tendencies towards "edit wars" about what the "right" way to present information is.
- Keeping the FAQ on the FM alt forum allows the members here to most easily contribute their knowledge. The approach is not as "polished" or orderly as a maintained website or wiki, but is perhaps the best way to let a crowd of people all contribute their own insights without being filtered through the biases of what a small group of core maintainers decide is interesting and relevant.
This is why I proposed the "model" for how the FAQ could expand though "contributed articles" in other threads on the forum. When a forum member has a particular alt-related area of knowledge that they want to share, they can write up a short "article" explaining the subject and post it as a new thread (which will get linked to from the main FAQ). This then creates room on that thread for everyone else to contribute/discuss that particular subject area, perhaps adding diverse sample photos from other users of the same gear and filling in details not included in the original post. I think this model is what best takes advantage of the community already here at FM, rather than trying to create a new outside FAQ effort that would inevitably leave out some of the contributions that make these forums great....Show more →
Michael,
As soon as I saw your post I thought it was a great idea and you did a great job! As you wrote, local FAQs are great but not very dynamic as additions are not very easily done. This is overwhelming with all the ideas / suggestions but we could work on a system to ease the pain.
Any suggestions on a FAQ system is appreciated. An idea is to use something like the forum FAQ: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/faqforum.php - except that it could be edited/updated by selected members.
I would be happy to implement something that could be used and maintained by the community. I'm all ears.
Best,
Fred
Hi Fred, I'm glad you like the FAQ idea. I think the simplest and easiest way to add details and grow the FAQ on specific sub-topics is just to harness the already existing thread/discussion system (having people post "articles" on specific alt-lens topics as a new thread, followed by open discussion and contributions from the community at large; the resulting thread would then be indexed in the main FAQ thread). We already know how to create great informative discussions here . The one place that might benefit from a more complex editing scheme is the top FAQ sticky post; right now I'm the only one who can edit it (short of administrator intervention), but it might be useful to allow a select slightly wider group than just me to edit that one post.
There's lots more edits/improvements I intend to do as I get time (several good suggestions in this thread that I haven't had time to process); for now, I've just added a quick section on adapters with glass elements and "macro" adapters (a question that comes up fairly regularly, as in a post today).
Pentax M42 is in the same category as Pentax K. Canon FD is in the Contax/Leica/etc. category.
I really prefer the scheme of the latter category, for some reason.
About the FAQ, I think there is something that should perhaps be amended in this sentence: For lenses with much shorter register distances, e.g. Leica M on Canon, you're out of luck --- though you can likely use them on one of the increasingly popular mirrorless "electronic viewfinder interchangeable lens" ("EVIL") smaller format cameras.
Sony NEX is one of the increasingly popular platforms for alt lenses, but it's not an EVIL camera. It has no EVF but only a rear display. This has been called a MIL (mirrorless interchangeable lens) camera by some. I've also seen it with the C for camera included, but I like it better as an adjective, instead of talking about EVILCs and MILCs. We don't write DSLRC either.
whoever is moderating the thread should also delete all irrelevant posts (like the recommendations after they have been added) that way its clutter free...including my post here.
crazeazn wrote:
whoever is moderating the thread should also delete all irrelevant posts (like the recommendations after they have been added) that way its clutter free...including my post here.
Great idea! Unfortunately, it's not practical.
The moderator's primary responsibility is to keep the discourse civil, legal, and non-commercial. The moderator's secondary responsibility is to remember the moderator's primary responsibility.
Having an integrated and context-sensitive thread would be nice. Ideal, in fact. IMO the only practical way to do this, is to have a devoted Alternatives web site, with all of the support that entails. I've already offered to publish 'this site' on my domain, but have not yet received any offers to perform the many and sundry functions that are required. Frankly, I have the desire, but I don't have the time. I'm confident that many other FM Alt'ers are in a similar position.
The primary value of a thread-based FAQ is that you can always see everything that's ever been posted. Dialog, discussion and commentary rule! In order to effectively use a thread-based FAQ, you need advanced 'search skills'. Of course, the greatest challenge can be to know what to seek, and also to know that what you just found might be modified or refuted by subsequent information.
jcolwell wrote:
Great idea! Unfortunately, it's not practical.
The moderator's primary responsibility is to keep the discourse civil, legal, and non-commercial. The moderator's secondary responsibility is to remember the moderator's primary responsibility.
Having an integrated and context-sensitive thread would be nice. Ideal, in fact. IMO the only practical way to do this, is to have a devoted Alternatives web site, with all of the support that entails. I've already offered to publish 'this site' on my domain, but have not yet received any offers to perform the many and sundry functions that are required. Frankly, I have the desire, but I don't have the time. I'm confident that many other FM Alt'ers are in a similar position.
The primary value of a thread-based FAQ is that you can always see everything that's ever been posted. Dialog, discussion and commentary rule! In order to effectively use a thread-based FAQ, you need advanced 'search skills'. Of course, the greatest challenge can be to know what to seek, and also to know that what you just found might be modified or refuted by subsequent information....Show more →
thats what i do for our regional thread... we keep the actual FAQ clear and free..so u can search easily in that one thread instead of wading through 1000s of posts...then we have another sticky that has all the discourse itself.
crazeazn wrote:
thats what i do for our regional thread... we keep the actual FAQ clear and free..so u can search easily in that one thread instead of wading through 1000s of posts...then we have another sticky that has all the discourse itself.
Mike how about adding a section with example of Samuli's or Luka's resize and sharpen routine for everyone, since a lot of people are wanting to find this.
wayne seltzer wrote:
Mike how about adding a section with example of Samuli's or Luka's resize and sharpen routine for everyone, since a lot of people are wanting to find this.
I agree it's quite valuable info but it doesn't really have anything to do with alt lenses.
Wow!! What a wealth of great information! Thank you for making this. I registered to this forum after reading this FAQ. Sure looks like a nice place to learn and hang out!
If I missed this my apologies....
Would it be possible to have a post explaining...
...the various chipped adapters available such as the Optix V series vs the 1st generation and any other variations....
...the various alternative focusing screens available from 3rd party manufacturers?
