Aspect ratios - 3:2, 4:3, 16:9 - which one?

[azonicbruce]

As I've been researching the possible new purchase of a camera, it's become apparent that there are many options out there when it comes to available aspect ratios. Some cameras only have one, others offer all three (4:3, 3:2, 16:9). My personal experience has been going from film, to a 4:3 digital compact, to a 3:2 digital SLR, and the next camera looks like it will only offer 4:3 and 16:9. Honestly, I got quite used to the 3:2 ratio of my D30, and am wondering what I'm going to do. Find another camera with 3:2, or simply use 4:3 and perhaps crop to 3:2? Much of my workflow in PS, my macros, and website are all based off of 3:2.

It's almost like one of those "format wars", which one will prevail? TVs and computer screens are 4:3, but there seem to be more and more "widescreen" products that are trying to accomodate the 16:9 ratio. Most SLRs are still sticking to 3:2 (are there others out there?) and for many prints it works perfectly for that. Another example, I notice that digital picture frame are starting to be "all the rage" but none of them seem to be in the 3:2 ratio, just 4:3 or 16:9. It's been interesting to research about the history of these ratios, but there doesn't seem to be much info on what's in store for the future.

So what do you all think? Which ratio do you prefer? What advantages does one have (if any) over others? Is there a "movement" in the camera industry to move/settle on a certain aspect ratio? If there is, which one do you think will win out?

[almo]

As I've been researching the possible new purchase of a camera, it's become apparent that there are many options out there when it comes to available aspect ratios. Some cameras only have one, others offer all three (4:3, 3:2, 16:9). My personal experience has been going from film, to a 4:3 digital compact, to a 3:2 digital SLR, and the next camera looks like it will only offer 4:3 and 16:9. Honestly, I got quite used to the 3:2 ratio of my D30, and am wondering what I'm going to do. Find another camera with 3:2, or simply use 4:3 and perhaps crop to 3:2? Much of my workflow in PS, my macros, and website are all based off of 3:2.

It's almost like one of those "format wars", which one will prevail? TVs and computer screens are 4:3, but there seem to be more and more "widescreen" products that are trying to accomodate the 16:9 ratio. Most SLRs are still sticking to 3:2 (are there others out there?) and for many prints it works perfectly for that. Another example, I notice that digital picture frame are starting to be "all the rage" but none of them seem to be in the 3:2 ratio, just 4:3 or 16:9. It's been interesting to research about the history of these ratios, but there doesn't seem to be much info on what's in store for the future.

So what do you all think? Which ratio do you prefer? What advantages does one have (if any) over others? Is there a "movement" in the camera industry to move/settle on a certain aspect ratio? If there is, which one do you think will win out?

If you are not going Full Frame then 3:2. This is coming form someone that sold his Canon D60 last december and bought into the 4/3 system from Olympus. A short 5 months later and I was back to Canon with a fresh D60. If you can afford it go with the 30D. Even a 20D would be a good choice. I went with the D60 because I have used one in the past, and my budget didn't really allow me to go any newer.

I would stick with Canon, especially coming off a superb camera like the D30. The D30 was my first DSLR and I loved it! An the newer canons have that same feel. It's like a warm handshake to pick up an EOS.

[Asylum Steve]

It's almost like one of those "format wars", which one will prevail?...

From a pro's point of view, shooting is all about cropping options. Sure, I shoot a variety of "framings" of my subjects to cover myself, but each shot itself usually has cropping options as well. So, the more frame space, the better.

As for final format, I'm governed (for the most part) by the two full bleed (no borders) magazine page dimensions of whomever I'm shooting for: a singe full page vertical and a two page horizontal spread.

OTOH, let's not forget the time-honored classic square format. Nowdays it is often neglected, but over the years it has provided some of the strongest and most powerful photographic imagery (think 2 1/4 format, as well as record album and CD artwork).

Still, I often crop square from a rectangular original, so in that sense it's a moot point...