So why don't people ever talk about the 4/3 aspect ratio?

Started Jan 28, 2014 | Discussions thread
David Kieltyka
David Kieltyka Veteran Member • Posts: 4,949
I've never liked 3:2

Even as a teenager using my dad's cameras I didn't much like the width of the 3:2 frame. As a result I learned to frame more top-to-bottom, accepting that many photos would have extra "stuff" at the sides. When I learned to develop and print b&w film my prints were often cropped to 4:3 or 5:4 or sometimes square. Later on, when I went back to color and started using Kodachrome, I opted for a wider approach and began framing more side-to-side. But now I had extra stuff at the top & bottom of many photos. It was only when I got my first film scanner that I could finally crop all the color photos properly. I found I really liked 7:4 (which is very close to 16:9).

Right now most of my digital cameras are 4:3 and the two that aren't get used in 16:9 mode almost exclusively. When I print I like a squarer image and for screen (TV) display I like to fill the available width. This leaves 3:2 as the odd format out...too wide for paper (not counting panos), not wide enough for pixels. But with EVF cameras it doesn't matter!


 David Kieltyka's gear list:David Kieltyka's gear list
Leica M9-P Leica M8.2 Sony Alpha a7R II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Leica M10 +6 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow