Aspect Ratios on Olympus cameras vs Panasonic?

Started 6 days ago | Questions thread
OP Andrew Mitchell Senior Member • Posts: 1,823
Re: Aspect Ratios on Olympus cameras vs Panasonic?

Guy Parsons wrote:

Mark Ransom wrote:

Guy Parsons wrote:

Andrew Mitchell wrote:

I am thinking of buying my first M43 camera. My 2010 Sony A55 is on its last legs, and I’m getting a bit bored with the constant 28mm of my Fuji X70 (although I still use it).

It is a toss up between the older Olympus EM10 Mark 3, or the newer Panasonic GX9. I have not decided on a lens yet, but I’m more comfortable with primes than cheap zooms. With the sales that are on at the moment, the Olympus is very, very competitively priced, even though my gut favors the Panasonic.

For better or worse, my favorite aspect ratio has always been 16:9 for stills (I don’t shoot much video).

My question is this: Is there any difference between the 2 cameras when shooting in 16:9? In Panasonic’s literature, 16:9 is listed as an option, but this is not the case with the Olympus, hence the question.

Any help would be most welcome. Thanks

Page 73 of the E-M10 Mk3 manual says.....

"You can change the aspect ratio (horizontal-to-vertical ratio) when taking pictures.
Depending on your preference, you can set the aspect ratio to [4:3] (standard), [16:9],
[3:2], [1:1], or [3:4]."

So it's just like all the other Olympus and Panasonic bodies, they all do 16:9 if you need it.

Just because they all support it, doesn't tell you which does it better.

What makes it "better"?

The image in the selected aspect ratio consisting of hopefully enough pixels to cover the print size that the user wants.

Most users never print so the pixel count does not matter that much for monitor or TV screen viewing. A 4MP or 5MP camera is all that is needed for that.

If they print bigger than A3 size then maybe some more care or consideration about pixels may need to be taken, 8MP and up advised to get A3. More for bigger.

You can get the different aspect ratio by cropping, by cropping and resizing, or by cropping one dimension and adding more sensor in the other. To start even evaluating them, you'd want to know the exact pixel dimensions produced in the 16:9 mode on each camera. If the width is the same in 4:3 mode and 16:9 mode, it's probably just cropping the top and bottom of the image.

Yes, that exactly what all Olympus and most Panasonic do, crop top and bottom to get 16:9. If a duck occupies most of the frame at 16:9 then the pixels per duck at all other aspect ratios will be the same, no loss of resolution on the subject just because the top and bottom are cropped.

All cameras made now have more than enough pixels for most folks' purposes so it is a fruitless exercise to lose sleep over whether it's a multi-aspect ratio sensor or a cropped aspect ratio sensor.

The advantage at least of the Olympus raw file is that even if you shoot jpegs at 16:9 then the raw file is the full 4:3 so in post process you can maybe decide to later slide the 16:9 crop up or down a bit within the 4:3 frame. I guess Panasonic would do the same.

I find the multi aspect ratio sensored Panasonic LX3 a pain as when I switch to 16:9 then that's all the raw file I get, a 16:9, but admittedly with the slight advantage of a wider scene than at 4:3 or 3:2.

Regards..... Guy

The LX3: my favorite camera of all time!

-- hide signature --

Andrew (Brit expat in Taipei, Taiwan since 1985)

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow