Aspect ratio: I am having trouble understanding the aspect ratio for my Canon EOS 7D Mark ll. It offers 3:2, 4:3, 16:9 and 1:1. I have left it at 3:2. Could someone explain what all...

will47 Loc: Indianapolis, IN

I am having trouble understanding the aspect ratio for my Canon EOS 7D Mark ll. It offers 3:2, 4:3, 16:9 and 1:1. I have left it at 3:2. Could someone explain what all this means and when to change it, if at all? Your assistance will be greatly appreciated.

ricardo7 Loc: Washington, DC - Santiago, Chile

3:2 = 12x8 equivalent format
4:3 = 12x9 equivalent format
16:9 is panoramic: could be 16x9, 32x18 etc.
1:1 is square format

5:4 would be 5x4, 10x8, 20x16, 24x20 etc.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Ricardo is quite right. The complete explanation is the width to height ratio. Let's take the first one 3:2. This image is 3 units long for ever 2 units height. Therefore, the resulting images could be 3x2, 6x4, 9x6, 12x8. Simply multiply the two numbers by 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. The results are still a 3 to 2 ratio. The same applies to the other rations. If you are using inches the results would be in inches, or whatever units you choose to use. I hope this helps.
--Bob

will47 wrote:

I am having trouble understanding the aspect ratio for my Canon EOS 7D Mark ll. It offers 3:2, 4:3, 16:9 and 1:1. I have left it at 3:2. Could someone explain what all this means and when to change it, if at all? Your assistance will be greatly appreciated.

tinplater Loc: Scottsdale, AZ

You can, of course, crop to any aspect in post so you may just leave at the format that uses all of the sensor. On the other hand, if you definitely know which aspect you want to use as you shoot, then having the camera select the aspect ratio will allow you to full frame your image in camera.

dylee8 Loc: South Florida

All of above are correct. But understand also that all dslr sensors have a 6x4 aspect ratio. Lets say you have a 24mp camera, shooting any other aspect ratios will result in an uncropped image less than 24mp.

Joe Blow

I would suggest leaving the aspect ratio at 3:2. That way if you want to print and frame, it will take minimal cropping to reach 5 X 3 1/2; 6 X 4; 7 X 5; 8 X 10; etc.

16 X 9 is wide screen and 1 X 1 is square. As mentioned above, these ratios can always be achieved by cropping in post. You can also make custom ratios in post too.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

will47 wrote:

I am having trouble understanding the aspect ratio for my Canon EOS 7D Mark ll. It offers 3:2, 4:3, 16:9 and 1:1. I have left it at 3:2. Could someone explain what all this means and when to change it, if at all? Your assistance will be greatly appreciated.

This means you can crop in camera rather than post processing. Personally, I think you are right to get all the pixels (the 3:2 aspect ratio) and then decide if you want crop some of them off the final image.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

dylee8 wrote:

All of above are correct. But understand also that all dslr sensors have a 6x4 aspect ratio. Lets say you have a 24mp camera, shooting any other aspect ratios will result in an uncropped image less than 24mp.

Sorry, Dylee, but you're wrong on a couple of points. 6x4, or 3x2 aspect ratio is the most common but not the only dslr ratio. There are many 4x3 ratios, mostly point and shoot, and 1x1's. When you shoot 3x2 sensor at a different format, will not be "uncropped" but is cropped in-camera instead of post processing. Yes, the pixel count will be reduced.

dylee8 Loc: South Florida

Thanks for pointing that out Oddjobber. As a Nikon shooter one of my pet peeves is my 6x4 dslr sensor. Since I frequently print at 10x8, and display at 16x9. I always felt 6x4 is a bad starting point for cropping in pp, and I am wasting megapixels. Can you suggest a dslr that has a different and hopefully a better sensor aspect ratio?

And yes it is in camera crop therefore losing mps. I should say prior to cropping in pp.

OddJobber wrote:

Sorry, Dylee, but you're wrong on a couple of points. 6x4, or 3x2 aspect ratio is the most common but not the only dslr ratio. There are many 4x3 ratios, mostly point and shoot, and 1x1's. When you shoot 3x2 sensor at a different format, will not be "uncropped" but is cropped in-camera instead of post processing. Yes, the pixel count will be reduced.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

dylee8 wrote:

Thanks for pointing that out Oddjobber. As a Nikon shooter one of my pet peeves is my 6x4 dslr sensor. Since I frequently print at 10x8, and display at 16x9. I always felt 6x4 is a bad starting point for cropping in pp, and I am wasting megapixels. Can you suggest a dslr that has a different and hopefully a better sensor aspect ratio?

And yes it is in camera crop therefore losing mps. I should say prior to cropping in pp.

The 4/3rds sensor is the the best fit for all the standard print sizes. It will lose the least amount of pixels for most aspect ratios. And in some cases, like 30 X 40, it uses all the pixels. It is just most people do not want to sell their equipment just to get an aspect ratio advantage. It is easier just to crop. So unless your equipment is becoming too big and balky, I would suggest cropping before changing out systems.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

dylee8 wrote:

Thanks for pointing that out Oddjobber. As a Nikon shooter one of my pet peeves is my 6x4 dslr sensor. Since I frequently print at 10x8, and display at 16x9. I always felt 6x4 is a bad starting point for cropping in pp, and I am wasting megapixels. Can you suggest a dslr that has a different and hopefully a better sensor aspect ratio?

And yes it is in camera crop therefore losing mps. I should say prior to cropping in pp.

You post the greatest perpleximent here.

As you mention 10x8 and 16x9, there is no camera that can do both without cropping. I only shoot Nikon FX and DX, both 3x2. My only solution is to shoot wide enough to allow for multiple cropping options. I think it's pretty much accepted here that 16mp is adequate for even large printing. I shoot anywhere from 24 to 45mp and then crop away!

If I need an oddball custom ratio for printing, I can get a custom mat made for about 5 bucks. My most common is 8x10 in an 11x14 frame.

David in Dallas Loc: Dallas, Texas, USA

No one has mentioned it, but the 3x2 aspect ratio is a holdover from film photography--it is what standard 35mm cameras used (image was 36x24mm). The 16x9 format is what a lot of computer monitors have, so it is also quite popular in digital photography. (My church requests I use 16x9 when offering photos for its displays--we have a volunteer group that provides that service.) The 4x5 format is what was needed for making 8x10 prints. And 4x3 is what the early TV screens had.

Haydon

Thanks for sharing this Ricardo!

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

wdross wrote:

This means you can crop in camera rather than post processing. Personally, I think you are right to get all the pixels (the 3:2 aspect ratio) and then decide if you want crop some of them off the final image.

Yes, whatever the native aspect ration is of the camera, crop later. (Some cameras do not have a 3:2 native aspect ratio.)

dylee8 Loc: South Florida

Yes the lineage of dslr traces to 35mm cameras and inherits the 3x2 aspect (not exact, varies by manufacturer, but close enough). Mirrorless, at 4x3, is better suited for todays wider format. As an example, a 24 mp camera, at 4x3 sensor, yields a maximum of 20.25 mp for 16x9. While the same megapixel camera with 3x2 only yields a maximum of 18mp.

Question is, of course, why the video world moves from square to wide to wider, the photography world is still squarish. Maybe because a circular lens and a wide rectangular sensor do not work well together. Maybe someone here can offer a better explanation.

David in Dallas wrote:

No one has mentioned it, but the 3x2 aspect ratio is a holdover from film photography--it is what standard 35mm cameras used (image was 36x24mm). The 16x9 format is what a lot of computer monitors have, so it is also quite popular in digital photography. (My church requests I use 16x9 when offering photos for its displays--we have a volunteer group that provides that service.) The 4x5 format is what was needed for making 8x10 prints. And 4x3 is what the early TV screens had.