When I first converted to the micro 4/3 system, I had trouble getting used to the 4x3 crop. While I know you can choose a different crop in the camera, I prefer to work in RAW anyway and it also never made any sense to throw away pixels the camera came with. For the past year, I have been going back and forth between post-process cropping images in the original aspect ration of 4x3 or cropping to 2x3. Although I rarely actually print 4x6 images, whenever I crop to 4x3 I find my self leaving enough room at the top and bottom in case it does end up printed. While I acknowledge that even cropping to 2x3, you need to leave room on left and right if you plant to print 5x7 or 8x10, it seems easier to leave room on the left and right. When viewing on-line, usually I find that the larger height of the 4x3 crop looks better, since usually it is the width that restricts the size of the image. However, it just feels like I am looking at an old "tube" tv instead of a nice widescreen HD tv. Am I the only one who continually goes back and forth with this internal debate?