1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

16:9 LCD for stills?

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by a_hit_of_meth, Jan 7, 2012.

  1. a_hit_of_meth

    a_hit_of_meth Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 7, 2012
    First off, apologies if this or a similar question has already been asked. I have done a few searches but I am in a bit of a hurry for some info and opinions.

    In choosing between the E-pl2 and E-pl3, there isn't much in it. I initially thought the lack of hand grip on the newer model would be a dealbreaker, especially for someone with large hands like myself but after testing both at the showroom, I found that the newer model actually feels quite good to hold.

    The only real advantage I can see from the reviews is the focusing lamp. I don't care much about the faster af, more focusing points and more art filters, I just like the look and feel of the E-p3 a little better. The only thing is that the 16:9 three inch lcd means I will have to crop images to 4:3 effectively making the image into a smaller 2.4'' (according to DCResource) with black bars on the sides. I spoke to someone earlier today who said it's something the user will get used to but I don't know if that's true. The articulated screen seems like a good idea but I don't know if having extra angles is such an advantage if the image used for composing shots is smaller. I just don't know why they fitted a screen suited more for video's for a product meant for shooting stills.

    Anyway, any info or opinions would be appreciated.

    Edit: I do not plan on purchasing or using the EVF's available for the cameras so the LCD will be my only means for composing shots.
  2. zerotiu

    zerotiu Mu-43 Veteran

    Sep 13, 2011
    I don't quite get this 'The only thing is that the 16:9 three inch lcd means I will have to crop images to 4:3 effectively making the image into a smaller 2.4'' (according to DCResource) with black bars on the sides.'

    The image result, if you view it on a computer, they won't have black bars. Any size format (3:2,4:3,16:9,...) won't have black bars. There are black bars when you view it on the camera lcd because the camera is 16:9.
  3. atomic

    atomic Mu-43 Veteran

    Nov 3, 2011
    The camera makes use of the black bars for the on screen info, so it doesn't overlay the image. I find this quite nice on the E-PM1.
  4. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    If you don't care about AF and you intend to use the LCD only, not the EVF, I think the E-PL2 makes more sense. The LCD is how you compose, and to me that's the most important control on a camera. 2.4" and 3.0" aren't worlds apart, but it is a substantial difference.

  5. mr_botak

    mr_botak Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 4, 2011
    Reading, UK
    I agree with atomic - you don't notice. They couldn't have put a much taller LCD there anyways. I've also really started to like 16x9 crops for which it is handy.
  6. Biro

    Biro Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    May 8, 2011
    Jersey Shore
    I have an E-PM1 and the 16:9 LCD bothers me not at all and doesn't affect the photos I take. Selecting an aspect ratio in the camera's menu will affect the results I get.

    Also, the OP might want to think about how he or she views images. If it's on a digital TV or widescreen computer monitor, shooting stills in 16:9 might be a good idea. I personally tend to favor 3:2, which is the same aspect ratio that I get with my DSLR kit. There's no reason to be wedded to 4:3.

    It sounds like the OP would be happy enough with the E-PL2 - at least for now. As he or she gains more experience, a camera with better performance might become more important. The same goes for the EVF.
  7. zacster

    zacster Mu-43 Regular

    Nov 4, 2011
    I remember thinking about this when widescreen TV was first hitting the shelves. Why would I buy a 32" widescreen when a 32" 4x3 would give me more picture. At the time the only programming available was 4x3.

    Back to the camera, the E-PM1 makes good use of the side bars with the info, rather than superimposing it on the frame.
  8. a_hit_of_meth

    a_hit_of_meth Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 7, 2012
    Thanks guys, I guess it's a matter of personal preference since I've always prefered viewing images in 4:3 even on widescreen monitors. I'll have another look to see if I can work with the smaller images on the E-pl3.

    This is exactly my point. Do you think that having an articulated screen makes up for the smaller image displayed?
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.