Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > Newbie Help

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 18, 2010, 9:59 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
flasha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fremantle, West Australia
Posts: 217
Default Question Re:Camera Aspect Ratio

Hi all,
I have a question re:Aspect Ratio. I notice that there are 3 to choose from my camera which are 4:3,3:2 and 16:9. It is currently set at 4:3 but have been reading about 3:2 being a popular configuration. In what way does each setting have on outcome of photos whether it be print or just storage.
I have a Fuji HS-10 so would any of those settings make a difference as compared to a dslr which seems to be 3:2, and why do people shoot 3:2.
The fuji is a nice camera for my needs atm but still a few things still to be learnt.

Any feedback would be apreciated and thankyou for taking time to read.

flasha
flasha is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 18, 2010, 11:28 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

The aspect ratio of the image doesn't really mean anything all by itself. What matters is what you'll ultimately do with it.

The Fuji HS-10 has three different aspect ratios, each of which creates images with maximum resolutions of 3,648 x 2,736 (4:3), 3,648 x 2,432 (3:2), and 3,648 x 2,056 (16:9). Notice that the horizontal resolution of these images is the same; the only difference is the vertical resolution. All the HS-10 does to create images at other aspect ratios is crop the 4:3 original.

So if all you'll ever be doing is 4x6 prints, then the 3:2 aspect ratio is fine and anyting else is wasted. That is, if you print a 4:3 image at 4x6, then the top and bottom of the image will be cropped off anyway. And if the image is 16:9, then the left and right sides will be cropped off and the resulting image will have a lower resolution.

But if all you'll ever be doing is displaying them on your big screen TV or widescreen monitor, then anything other than 16:9 images will have black bars on each side and the higher resolution will be wasted in downsampling.

Personally, I'd go with the 4:3 aspect ratio. It gives the greatest resolution in either direction, so you can crop wherever you want, for any purpose. Plus, you can create portrait (vertical) images from landscape (horizontal) images and still have a relatively high resolution images.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.

Last edited by TCav; Sep 18, 2010 at 11:30 AM.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 18, 2010, 2:34 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
flasha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fremantle, West Australia
Posts: 217
Default

Hi TCav, thankyou for clearing that up for me.
Still getting used to all this but I guess when you
read then always questions arise.
The way I understand now is that leaving @ 4:3 makeyou master
of your domain.

Thankyou
__________________
All critiques welcome
Cheers,
Flasha

John 6:53-55
flasha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 18, 2010, 2:53 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flasha View Post
The way I understand now is that leaving @ 4:3 makeyou master
of your domain.
Well, I don't know about "master of your own domain" , but 4:3 in the HS-10 give you more to play with than any other aspect ratio.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 19, 2010, 9:46 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
RioRico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: In mountainous California or Arizona or Guatemala or somewhere.
Posts: 224
Default

All aspects ratios have their roots somewhere: traditional Western art (4:3, 4:5), cine and still film (3:2), wide video (16:9), simplicity (1:1). Then there are the 2:1 and 3:1 etc panorama formats. All have their uses. Some MF makers produced 6x7cm cameras because the output fits into standard 8x10" picture frames with least cropping. Some love 1:1 because you never have to rotate the camera. I find 4:3 usually looks best in portrait mode, and 3:2 and 16:9 usually look best in landscape mode, though tall thin pictures have their own drama.

I shoot a Pentax dSLR that's entirely 3:2; and Sony P&S's that let me select 4:3 or 3:2 (which I use when I want a "film look"); and 6x6 and 6x9 film cams. It would be REAL NICE to have a camera that let me slide between any format from 1:1 to 4:1. Of course, any format can be cropped or stitched. I may stitch shots into long thin (wide or tall) panos, or into square-ish matrices. I may shoot fisheye circles or stitched ellipses. Whatever format works...
__________________
Too many film+digi cams+lenses, oh my -- Pentax K20D, ZX-M, M42's, P&S's, more
The opposite of LIBERAL is not CONSERVATIVE, but ENSLAVED.
RioRico is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 19, 2010, 11:30 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
frank-in-toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto Canada
Posts: 1,083
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
The aspect ratio of the image doesn't really mean anything all by itself. What matters is what you'll ultimately do with it....
For sure. I don't have an HS10 but I do have the Sony a550 which will do 3:2 or 16:9. I use 3:2 when I expect to be editing the pictures. If I'm planning to just upload them to a photo site, I shoot 16:9. There's no way I'm going to go thru hundreds of pictures and crop each one. The one point I'm trying to make is that the Sony adds crop lines to the OVF that are practically invisible when you select 16:9. It displays the cropped view in the LCD properly when you select Live View. So using the OVF, I just hedge a bit and leave some room at the top and bottom. Usually it's ok. Since the HS10 is EVF, I'd expect it to just show you what you selected.

here's an aside: reviews are done by pros or folk with tons of experience. they seldom talk about these smaller issues. But these become big in usage.

and a question: I read this in the HS10 review on dcresource: "When shooting JPEGs, you'll wait for about two seconds before you can take another photo". Is this true?
frank-in-toronto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 19, 2010, 3:12 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
flasha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fremantle, West Australia
Posts: 217
Default

Thanks Rio and Framk for repying.
I think the 4:3 asprct would be best way to shoot
as you can crop thr photo later, I remember watching an irfan view tutorial about
cropping and dividing pixel density by print size or aspect ratio or something ajong those lines. Will have to find it and rewatch it.
RE: HS-10 2 second delay, in book it says default value is 1.5 seconds the shot picture will display. For me it is no different to any other p+s that I have used, not that I have used that many.

Cheers
__________________
All critiques welcome
Cheers,
Flasha

John 6:53-55
flasha is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:16 PM.