Using 3:2 it gives you the maximum pixels on 9m pixels, they spread the pixels differently then on the 4:3. When you are going to print on for example 30x45 cm, you are going to get the maximum with photo's on 3:2.

But, speaking of quality, the best jpeg compression factor is 9m Fine, and that's only 4:3. So, best way to find out is to make a few large prints with the different settings under 9m pixels and see what you like best.

Hi folks!

You wrote:

>Using 3:2 it gives you the maximum pixels on 9m pixels, they spread the pixels differently then on the 4:3. When you are going to print on for example 30x45 cm, you are going to get the maximum with photo's on 3:2.<

>But, speaking of quality, the best jpeg compression factor is 9m Fine, and that's only 4:3. So, best way to find out is to make a few large prints with the different settings under 9m pixels and see what you like best.<

Also an a erudite Nikon DSLR, told me that ALL the DSLR cameras use or deliver the 3.2 aspect ratio...so with those "changing lenses" bodies; the photographers who owned them, 90% will make prints...and NOT as mostly less expensives cameras owners that look the photos on the PC monitor...or send trough Email.

As well, when I or mostly cheaper camera owners intend to send photos attached to an a Email letter, my good sense tells me that It's NOT needed 9meg quality, 3meg or likewise 2meg suffices to make full the monitor CRT screen size.:?

Alex 007:|