Bison Bud

While I love the size of some of the new mirror less offerings, I can't seem to get past being restricted to the 4X3 aspect ratio. I have always considered the 3X2 aspect ratio as somewhat of a standard, which also doesn't make a lot of sense due to the standard print sizes often cropping the photo anyway. Therefore, I am wondering if any of our mirror less shooters find this at all restrictive and what standard print sizes they normally use?

davidl743

Don't find it to be a problem at all. I crop to the size I am printing and print 4x6, 5x7, 8x10, and 11x14 regularly.

Tigger1 Loc: Surrey, BC Canada

I have experience with the Olympus OMD line of cameras only but can confirm for this particular camera line that the following Image Aspect Ratios are available from the Menu: 4:3, 3:2, 1:1, 3:4, 16:9. Other camera manufacturers may or may not cover the same range of aspect ratios.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Sony and Fuji have mirrorless cameras with a 3:2 aspect ratio.

BebuLamar

Why do you think the 3:2 is the standard? The 4:3 format I can make prints in many popular sizes with the 4:3 format with very little cropping. There is no camera with multiformat (although they said so) the sensor is fixed at some format and setting the aspect ratio on the camera only crop for you. Since there is no camera that you can really change aspect ratio and you like the 3:2 then buy a 3:2 mirrorless camera. Sony and Fuji have them.

JPL

Many popular mirrorless cameras have sensors in the 3:2 format. I am using a Sony A7r and Nikon 1 J2. Both have that sensor format. It is only the M4/3 family of cameras that have the 4:3 format and even there you can choose another format if you prefer. So no restriction there either.

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

My Fuji cameras - X70 compact and X-Pro2 with interchangeable lenses - use 3:2 as their native format.
Fuji's build quality and sharp, fast lenses are excellent. /Ralph

jcboy3

If you like printing to 4x6 inches, then the 3:2 aspect ratio is perfect for you; no cropping required.

If you print to most other standard sizes such as 5x7, 8x10, 11x14, 16x20 or 20x24, then you will need to crop. In that case, the 4:3 aspect ratio requires less cropping.

So, if you shoot 3:2, then you have to crop the following percentage of the image for these print sizes:

0%, 7%, 20%, 18%, 20%, 25%

And, if you shoot 4:3, then you have to crop the following percentage of the image for these print sizes:

11%, 5%, 7%, 5%, 7%, 11%

As these numbers show, shoot 3:2 if you print 4x6; shoot 4:3 otherwise.

Finally, if you shot a little too tight, since you don't need to crop as much with 4:3 you can compensate by scaling without noticeable impact.

Bison Bud

I guess I thought all mirrorless cameras had 4X3 sensors and cropping was the only alternative to changing the aspect ratio. However, it would appear that there are indeed some mirrorless cameras that do have 3X2 sensors and I will need to look into that option a bit further. As to what is standard, I'm not sure how we got to where we are with this aspect either as photo sizes and print sizes aren't all that compatabile in the first place! Thanks for the feedback.

Tigger1 Loc: Surrey, BC Canada

I think it has to do with the 35mm film size, i.e. 36mm x 24mm = 3:2 which many camera manufacturers adopted years before digital evolved.

JPL

The 3:2 format is what was called the "golden ratio" Fits very well for the eye of the viewer to produce the ideal picture size fitting your eyes.
The 4:3 ratio is more in order to get the most out of a lens, which is circular. Needs less cropping f.x. for 1:1 pictures and some other formats.

jcboy3

The golden ratio is a little larger than 1.6:1, so 3:2 is close, but not exact. But also totally irrelevant.

35mm film was originally developed for motion pictures, and the frame size for 35mm motion pictures was 4:3 format. This film was later used for still pictures; the orientation was rotated so film advance horizontally, and two frames were used to make a single still image frame. This resulted in a 3:2 image format that was retained, for no particularly good reason, with DSLR development.

JPL

This is actually an interesting discussion. The thing is that the first format for still images patented from the 35 mm film was 24x18 mm, which is actually a 4:3 format. But later on people working on this did not like the format/size and rotated the film and made 1 frame from 2 like you stated. But also got almost the golden ratio which is more pleasant for most people. And now this has been the most popular still photography format for almost 100 years.

So even if the golden ratio is maybe totally irrelevant it is probably the main reason for the longevity of this format.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

All of the above maybe true to one degree or another, but there are probably more factors to take into account. 35mm film changed many things. There were (and still are) varying aspect ratios for medium and large format cameras, but the convenience, affordability and ubiquitous availability of 35mm film made high quality photography available to a very large market, building an entire market segment based on a standard form factor. It takes something pretty significant to change that, which the advent of digital was, where sensor size wasn't constrained by film format. Another factor is cost of producing larger sensors balanced against other things like physical form factors, and image quality which are all in transition.

Some vendors standardize on specific form factors, others offer a choice.

So we have mirror less cameras from many vendors, some m4/3 so 4:3, others APS-C so 3:2, other FF so also 3:2, and more. The list of vendor options is quite large, far more than just

Olympus, Fuji and Sony. Nikon has some, even Canon has some (APS-C) which are beginning to become competitive.

The old rules of the 35mm era film are gone, and we have an open field in a transitional market.

jcboy3

Not really. Medium format 120 was far more popular, and produced much better results, until the 1970's brought about an increase in 35mm use by photo-journalists with Nikon cameras. And larger format 4x5 was best for landscape shooters even in the 2000's. 35mm was good for sports and action because you could get telephoto lenses and shoot frames rapidly.

I think the most popular still photography format is now 4:3. Most digital cameras are 4:3, most smart phones are 4:3 or 16:9 (for movies, primarily). The 3:2 format got stuck in the 35mm film era, and the use of legacy lenses in the digital age.