E-M10 aspect ratio suggestion - Duh, never mind :-(

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by bomo, Jul 27, 2015.

  1. bomo

    bomo Mu-43 Regular

    95
    May 7, 2014
    Hudson Valley, New York
    Wayne
    I noticed on my E-M10 that the aspect ratios include 4:3 16:9 3:2 1:1 and 3:4. Since the LCD is tilt only, I thought the 3:4 ratio would be useful when shooting in portrait mode without rotating the camera 90 degrees plus the tilt screen would be quite effective. Unfortunately, this aspect ratio does not rotate the display, but rather crops the image. It would be great if a firmware update would be available to do a simple rotation of the display when using the 3:4 aspect ratio and maintaining full resolution.

    Any thoughts?
     
  2. MarkRyan

    MarkRyan Instagram: @MRSallee

    772
    May 3, 2013
    California
    You're giving away a lot of resolution by switching to that aspect ratio. Personally, I wouldn't use it.
     
  3. alan1972

    alan1972 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    592
    Jun 23, 2012
    Malaga, Spain
    Alan Grant
    I would certainly be interested in something that improves the experience shooting in portrait orientation, which seems to me to be a shortcoming of many cameras. Could you explain more fully what your are proposing? You said "without rotating the camera", which means without rotating the sensor... how would full resolution be maintained? Maybe I am misunderstanding something.
     
  4. agentlossing

    agentlossing Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jun 26, 2013
    Andrew Lossing
    That results in the longest pixel measurement being the vertical one, meaning the horizontal measurement is cropped heavily. Definitely wouldn't do that unless small prints or small web view is all you want it for.
     
  5. Klorenzo

    Klorenzo Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 10, 2014
    Lorenzo
    With the other OM-D models you can add the vertical grip with an extra shutter button. Not many options with the E-M10 that I know of.

    With the E-M10 I do not find it extremely uncomfortable, at least for a couple of shots...
     
  6. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    The new G7 is a similar level to the E-M10 (although newer) and has the flip out screen which allows portrait or landscape oriented shots with LCD angle. Might be a more realistic solution?

    FWIW, the square 6x6 film format was often touted as ideal because it didn't require rotating the camera.
     
  7. bomo

    bomo Mu-43 Regular

    95
    May 7, 2014
    Hudson Valley, New York
    Wayne
    Duh - Of course you're right! You can't rotate the display without rotating the camera/sensor. Chalk it up to an aging brain too early in the morning.
     
  8. Ian.

    Ian. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2013
    Munich
    Ian
    Mirrorless cameras do not need to have a rectangular sensor. So if they had a square or circular sensor, you could freely change ratios to any you like. Including portrait format without turning the camera or losing resolution. If you wanted a square format, for example, you'd get the best out of the lens and get a great resolution in both directions.
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2015
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    There is no magic ratio. A wider aspect ratio favors maximum AOV along one axis, and a more square format maximizes overall area. Choosing one always compromises the other. Both have their pros and cons. Even in a sensor the full size of the imaging circle, you have to choose- unless you wish to output in a vignetted square.

    Panasonic multi-aspect sensors found in some cameras (mostly LX compacts) had a nice solution for this by offering an oversized sensor that could cover 16:9, 4:3 and 3:2 aspects with the full imaging circle, but still had cropped 1:1.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. bomo

    bomo Mu-43 Regular

    95
    May 7, 2014
    Hudson Valley, New York
    Wayne
    Technically there are certainly interesting solutions other than just a fully articulating screen. A square sensor being one of them. I suspect many users would be aghast at throwing away resolution to get to the final desired aspect ratio. But then many may find the 1:1 ratio artistically satisfying.
     
  11. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    If you had a sensor that covered the entire imaging circle, then you'd have a lot of options, but it would come at the expense of wasting a LOT of expensive sensor area for each shot. You'd need a 21.6x21.6mm sensor to project your 21.6mm diameter imaging circle on to. That is almost 30% more area than APS-C. At most, you'd only be able to use 1/2 of that area in any given image (without massive vignetting or circular output).

    I guess if you wanted what is essentially a FF camera with an m4/3 lens mount, you'd be able to pull that off.
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2015
  12. CWRailman

    CWRailman Mu-43 Top Veteran

    564
    Jun 2, 2015
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Denny
    Those of us who shot 2.25 x 2.25 film format had that square format you talk about and quite frankly, it was a pain in the ass. To keep our subject within the printable area of the final format we usually shot with a mask or a grid over the viewing screen. There was a lot of waste in those square formats. Personally I prefer the formats most closely associated with conventional print sizes and rotating the camera seems like a very small inconvenience one I have to deal with because most of my images are shot in portrait format.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Ian.

    Ian. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2013
    Munich
    Ian
    The viewfinder shows you your chosen ratio. You don't need to crop twice as you do with a fixed ratio sensor.
     
  14. Pecos

    Pecos Mu-43 Top Veteran

    776
    Jan 20, 2013
    The Natural State
    The only reason I see to change the format for the image in-camera is if you just want to practice composing and shooting square images. Otherwise crop/change it in post-processing.
     
  15. Ian.

    Ian. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2013
    Munich
    Ian
    You might be thinking of cameras that have ratio adjustment on rectangular sensors. The idea of a circular sensor is that you don't crop twice. If your picture suits a ratio other than that of your fixed ratio sensor, today you have to accept that crop. And then crop again in pp. This is worse with the panoramic shaped aps-c sensors. Losing quality each time. And throwing away a large part of the image.
    The circular sensor let's you choose the best part of the whole round image from your lens with no loss of quality.
    This extra adjustment at shooting time might not be so good. There is enough to do already. But it's optional. And will suit certain types of photography.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2015
  16. proximal

    proximal Mu-43 Regular

    28
    Jun 28, 2011
    Sensors being squares/rectangles is conducive to the manufacturing process, where multiple sensors fabricated on a single wafer. If you make them as circles, you are throwing away sensor space at the fabrication level.
     
  17. Ian.

    Ian. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2013
    Munich
    Ian
    Sure. But it's not too bad as they'd actually have a flat top and sides, losing small triangles of wafer in the corners.
    wafer.
     
  18. CWRailman

    CWRailman Mu-43 Top Veteran

    564
    Jun 2, 2015
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Denny
    Can you explain what you mean by "crop twice"
     
  19. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    You would always have to crop once, though. ALWAYS, for every shot. The default output would be a weird fuzzy edged circle surrounded by black. We don't have round monitors or round papers, so you have to end up getting back to a rectangle for display. And what if you frame your scene so that a rectangular crop is not possible!
     
  20. tyrphoto

    tyrphoto Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 25, 2014
    Seoul | NYC
    ㅇtㅈyㅅr
    Slightly OT, but I wish Olympus would introduce in a future firmware update, a fix to rotate the info displayed while the camera is in portrait mode.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1