Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24

Thread: 16:9 vs 4:3

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    49
    i wish i had a 28mm lens =/
    Sony Cybershot DSC-w30 (killed in bike crash)

    Canon Rebel XTi soon

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    51
    I think if you can handle the smaller resolution (which is more than acceptable for most applications), and you mainly view the pictures on your monitor, go for it. You can always crop a little bit in order to get a 4x6 or similar proportion print done.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    49
    the only thing i dont like about 16:9 is the fact that a good portion of the bottom is cut off. i think ill just use it for scenery and use 4:3 for people and such
    Sony Cybershot DSC-w30 (killed in bike crash)

    Canon Rebel XTi soon

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,056
    Quote Originally Posted by regP View Post
    the only thing i dont like about 16:9 is the fact that a good portion of the bottom is cut off. i think ill just use it for scenery and use 4:3 for people and such
    regP, in the camera mentioned above, it isnt cut off. Thats the shape of the sensor. Moreover, while you can set it for 4x3 as well, in effect it is as though you have cropped the 16x9 image to make it 4x3 by cropping the sides off. Fortunately it has resolution to spare to be able to effect that without degrading the image. Also, it is a 28mm wide lens EQ.

    cheers
    Riley

    Pentax 110 auto SLR

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    49
    Quote Originally Posted by Riley View Post
    regP, in the camera mentioned above, it isnt cut off. Thats the shape of the sensor. Moreover, while you can set it for 4x3 as well, in effect it is as though you have cropped the 16x9 image to make it 4x3 by cropping the sides off. Fortunately it has resolution to spare to be able to effect that without degrading the image. Also, it is a 28mm wide lens EQ.

    cheers
    are you talking about the LX2? my camera is different because i took 2 of the exact same picture one with 4:3 and one with 16:9 and there was a noticeable cut off of the bottom of the screen with the 16:9. i guess its because i have a 35mm lens?
    Sony Cybershot DSC-w30 (killed in bike crash)

    Canon Rebel XTi soon

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,056
    no look regP, of course a 16x9 is a different shape and doesnt fit the screen. It is 16 units long by 9 units high, if your screen isnt that shape it has to appear with less height to fit it on. Among other things 16x9 require different shape paper to print too. If you want a 4x3 frame camera, why not look for one of those ?
    Riley

    Pentax 110 auto SLR

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    49
    im happy with my camera, i just realized it had 16:9 the other day though and so i started to mess around with it. check these 2 photos out. they are the exact same the camera was not moved, notice the pillows are cut off on the bottom in the 16:9 picture?


    Sony Cybershot DSC-w30 (killed in bike crash)

    Canon Rebel XTi soon

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,056
    there are wider monitors that make better use of 16x9 format now too
    Riley

    Pentax 110 auto SLR

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    49
    hmmm. thx for all the info. im not looking to make a switch to that aspect or anything i just wanted to know the ups and downs of it compared to 4:3. i like it because it fits my whole screen. its very annoying taking pictures at high 4:3 resolution only for them to be resized as small boxes because my monitor isnt big enough to fit it (22" widescreen 1680x1050 native resolution). so yeah i like 16:9 very much the only beef that i have with it is the fact that it cuts off the bottom some and that could screw me up if i was shooting something like a person because it might end up cutting their feet off or something. i learned a lot from this thread thx guys! i wish i was able to switch my lens for a 28mm so i can get some true wideview action. lol


    after i learn all i can on this camera im going to get a DSLR. ive always liked photography but im just now actually getting in to really learning how its done. im tired "point and shoot" photography especially because the Auto Mode on my camera is sucky as hell.
    Last edited by regP; 03-01-2007 at 12:35 AM.
    Sony Cybershot DSC-w30 (killed in bike crash)

    Canon Rebel XTi soon

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    2,635

    Thumbs up 16:9 is a lot of fun to compose with...

    Even though it's lower resolution for MOST cameras and a weird crop, it's a very creative aspect ratio, seems to stimulate good photo composition. It's also similar to the aspect ratio of movies you see. Here are a few 16:9 shots I've taken. This one's from my Panasonic FX50:



    Another FX50 shot:



    Inside a restaurant with FZ30 at 1/4 second:



    With respect to cameras with 16:9 as a "native" format, the new Panasonic TZ3 uses its sensor in such a way as to provide full resolution in either 16:9, 3:2, or 4:3 aspect ratios.
    Let a be your umbrella!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •