Aspect Ratio?

Discussion in 'Panasonic Cameras' started by Frankie Carroll, Dec 28, 2015.

  1. Frankie Carroll

    Frankie Carroll Mu-43 Rookie

    12
    Sep 29, 2015
    I have a GX7 and I have the Aspect Ratio set to 3:2 but I was wondering is this something I can just set & then forget about or should I be changing it depending on what type of photo I am taking? In other words if I am taking a Potrait then I want to take a Landscape shot should I change the aspect ratio for each of the shots?

    Thanks in advance
     
  2. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    Hi, I'd leave it at 4:3 and crop in post. Otherwise, you're losing resolution.

    Barry
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  3. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    I always leave it at 4:3 and then crop, as Barry says.

    Obviously, seeing a different aspect ratio through the viewfinder can change the way you frame your image a bit. But I always appreciate having the extra resolution and the ability to see new pictures within it when I get the files onto the big screen.

    ...but if you shoot with RAW + JPEG it shouldn't matter, as I believe the RAW file is always 4:3, anyway.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    it all depends on whether the image you want happens at the point of firing the shutter or whether. like me that the final decision happens in a post production situation

    both are valid approaches... only you can decide

    K
     
  5. tyrphoto

    tyrphoto Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 25, 2014
    Seoul | NYC
    ㅇtㅈyㅅr
    It's all personal preference. Some people prefer using the full 4:3 resolution and cropping (if necessary) in post. Others who grew up with a 3:2 crop, prefer to frame and take images in 3:2 even if it means losing pixels.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. MichaelSewell

    MichaelSewell Mu-43 Top Veteran

    511
    Sep 1, 2015
    Burnley, UK
    Michael A. Sewell
    If you are shooting in raw, you still have the full sensor resolution, although it's shown as cropped in Lightroom. If you click on the crop indicator, which can be found bottom right in the thumbnail, the full image is revealed and you can resize the crop, move it, or do away with it as you please.

    I shoot at 3:2 because it suits my clients and my workflow, and also fits in when using multiple cameras of differing manufacturers. But if I need to give a little more headroom, I can shift the crop area up in LR, or revert to the full 4:3 aspect ratio.
    There's some clients I used to have to crop to 1:1 for their final image. Now I set the aspect ratio in camera, and it cuts out a fair bit of work in post. And as I've said, I can shift the crop if I've shot slightly off, or clipped the product.

    The above ONLY applies when shooting raw. If you're shooting jpeg, you get what you're given.
     
    • Informative Informative x 3
    • Agree Agree x 2
  7. MichaelSewell

    MichaelSewell Mu-43 Top Veteran

    511
    Sep 1, 2015
    Burnley, UK
    Michael A. Sewell
    Just check you get the same result from the GX7
     
  8. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    Michael
    though we come to photography from very different directions i do appreciate your contributions to the forum

    K
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  9. jyc860923

    jyc860923 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 28, 2012
    Shenyang, China
    贾一川
    Panasonic RAW crops too, unlike the Oly's
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    Oof, it's not just a metadata embed that gets read by the RAW converter?

    More reason, then, to always shoot 4:3.
     
  11. budeny

    budeny Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 4, 2014
    Boulder, CO
    FWIW, my GM1 and GM5 raw files were following ratio setting - i.e. coming out in less resolution and smaller size.
    I'd check, but I believe GX7 works the same.
     
  12. jyc860923

    jyc860923 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 28, 2012
    Shenyang, China
    贾一川
    Panasonic has the reason and technique I think, GH2 and LX100 for example, or any other multi-aspect sensors, can and will readout different sizes raw files, and that's what Panasonic did with most if not all of its models.
     
  13. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    Sometimes I wish M43 would just use an APS-C sized sensor while keeping the 4:3rd ratio. It'd be great for shooting in landscape while using something like the multi aspect ratio of the GH2 and utilizing focal reducer adapters to get a wider perspective.
     
  14. MichaelSewell

    MichaelSewell Mu-43 Top Veteran

    511
    Sep 1, 2015
    Burnley, UK
    Michael A. Sewell
    I believe you are right, although the GX8 appears to follow the Olympus example with regards to not cropping the raw data.
     
  15. Frankie Carroll

    Frankie Carroll Mu-43 Rookie

    12
    Sep 29, 2015
    Thanks for all the advise guys, I didn't realise I was losing resolution by shooting 3:2, I have now switched to the 4:3 aspect ratio so I will try that & see how that goes.

    Thanks again
     
  16. b_rubenstein

    b_rubenstein Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 20, 2012
    Melbourne, FL
    In camera cropping reduces file size, but has no effect on resolution. The resolution of a sensor is set by its spatial frequency, which is determined by the sensor's pixel pitch. Those are innate, physical properties of a sensor.
     
  17. fredlong

    fredlong Just this guy...

    Apr 18, 2011
    Massachusetts USA
    Fred
    The only u43 models with an oversized multi-aspect ratio sensor were the GH-1 and GH-2. All other models crop to aspect ratio.

    Fred
     
  18. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    Yes, it would probably end up being cheaper in the long run, too, since they wouldn't need specialized sensors developed, just get the latest APS-C offering from Sony...

    Many M4/3 lenses cover full APS-C already, and I suspect all of them would cover APS-C cropped to 4:3, with varying degrees of corner degradation, I imagine.
     
  19. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    We're talking total resolution, e.g. 16mp, not lpi.

    Barry
     
  20. David A

    David A Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 30, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    As far as I'm concerned, the aspect ratio control in the camera is useless for one very important reason: it doesn't let you control which part of the full frame is retained, it centres the selected aspect ratio on the centre of the frame and crops equally on the top and bottom or left and right.

    As an example of why I find that a problem, I sometimes want to crop an image taken with a wide wide angle but usually when that's the case I want to crop empty foreground. I'll shoot with the camera held with the sensor vertical so I keep my verticals parallel and they don't converge and that places the horizon dead centre. I like having a big sky but I don't like having a lot of empty foreground so I crop the bottom of the image but not the top, and I'll crop to something close to 3:2 or 16:9. If I use the aspect ratio control in the camera I can get the same image proportions but I lose a bit less foreground than I would like, and I lose sky which I don't like. If I frame the shot to reduce the amount of foreground to what I actually want, and to get as much sky as I actually want, I have to point the camera up a little and my verticals then start to converge which I don't want. If I correct the perspective in processing to eliminate the convergence I end up losing a bit at the sides of the frame which I don't want to do.

    So, the aspect ratio control is fine if you can get what you want in the centre of the frame exactly the way you want it. If you can't do that, then the aspect ratio control makes things worse, not better. Cropping during processing doesn't have that problem and it also allows you a lot more flexibility about how much you crop, where you crop it, and just what proportions you end up with. Sure, if the aspect ratios the camera offers don't include one that's exactly what you want for the shot then you can still crop afterwards in processing but if you're going to do that why not simply capture the whole image from the sensor in the first place and do all of the cropping during processing rather than some in camera which is what the aspect ratio setting does, and some later?

    About the only reason for using aspect ratio in camera is if you're shooting JPEG and are going to send the image to someone as quickly as possible without doing any processing to the image at all. If you're going to process, then you're better off adjusting the aspect ratio by cropping during processing simply because the options at that stage are a lot more flexible and you also don't have to worry about changing aspect ratio while you shoot in order to try and get the best aspect ratio for every image at the time of shooting.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1