Why are people still using 4.3?

roddydogs

The majority of us have W/s TVs & monitors, so why do people still use their cameras in 4.3? Just wondered.

JJ_Egan

My Box Brownie has no settings is why .

jje

[Deleted User]

Because my SLR's sensor has a 4/3 ratio - why would I want to crop my image?

kwikbreaks

I have several digital still cameras and from memory switching them to 16:9 just blanks out part of the sensor so you just lose some pixels. I don't think the viewfinders adjust to 16:9 either so you stand more chance of accidentally cropping off heads and feet. Anyhow I leave them at the default setting.

Video would maybe be worth setting to 16:9

[Deleted User]

Not to mention, photos aren't necessarily for displaying on a TV either

Nada666

Hmm, how many times do you want a photograph where your focus is on a panoramic view rather than on the person/object in the centre? Why waste pixels on unneeded peripheral fluff?

Most people don't understand why so many sheep have switched computer displays to 16:9 - that is where the craziness lies. Don't start trying to drive camera makers the same way. Automatic composite digital panoramic options are available for the few who want them.

[Deleted User]

Nada666 wrote: »

Hmm, how many times do you want a photograph where your focus is on a panoramic view rather than on the person/object in the centre? Why waste pixels on unneeded peripheral fluff?

Most people don't understand why so many sheep have switched computer displays to 16:9 - that is where the craziness lies. Don't start trying to drive camera makers the same way. Automatic composite digital panoramic options are available for the few who want them.

The crop of a photo is an important part of post-production and there's not a lot of need to put it 'in the camera' since you just loose pixels.

BUT.. it would be very interesting to see the results from a 16:9 sensor. I expect there would be great problems in the camera manufacture; since the lens aperture would need to be quite big (and therefore, the camera would be a bit rubbish in low light).

It's all physics - the ideal 'picture size' would be a circle; then it would match up nicely with the aperture of the lens.

Lum

Hell, even on computers 4:3 is sometimes still optimal.

I used to run a CRT at 1600x1200, occasionally setting it to 1920x1440 when I needed to do something specific on an A4 document that I needed to see full screen. It's now replaced with an LCD at 1920x1200 (16:10) which, in some ways, is a downgrade, however given that 1920x1440 on the CRT was painful on the eyes if you used it for too long, I'm not too bothered. I probably would be if I'd started with a better CRT though.

You can't even get 1920x1200 monitors any more, only 1920x1080, which would be a further downgrade and mean even more scrolling when working on a document.

This isn't helped by MS inflicting the ribbon upon us. I used to have all my toolbars on the side.

Nada666

Lum wrote: »

You can't even get 1920x1200 monitors any more, only 1920x1080, which would be a further downgrade and mean even more scrolling when working on a document.

This isn't helped by MS inflicting the ribbon upon us. I used to have all my toolbars on the side.

Yes. Just noticed a couple of days ago that ebuyer have removed natural resolution check boxes from their filters so it makes it more difficult than ever to find useable monitors.

Carrot007

Lum wrote: »

You can't even get 1920x1200 monitors any more, only 1920x1080, which would be a further downgrade

Of course you can. There are many 16:10 1920*1200 monitors out there.

However 16:9 1920*1080 are much more common and much cheaper. This is because they use a panel that is more mass produced as it is used in tvs.

And if it's a document you want to edit, consider a decent mount and use the monitor vertically, something which is simple thanks to the move from crts. Please note a decent mount will cost as much as a cheap monitor but people seem to resent buying one for some reason, much like they do a decent keyboard which is the part you use the most!

Lum

Appreciate the suggestion, but normally I work with two documents side by side, typically one will be a scan of some customer's document with handwritten scrawl all over it and the other will be a propietry DTP package that I use to actually do the work.

I could go with two vertical monitors, but that would be really weird for normal use and unusable for gaming. 1920x1200 serves me fine most of the time. 1920x1080 is less useful.

Also, find me a 1920x1200 laptop. They simply don't exist unless second hand.

As for keyboards, mine cost me £200. It's a Kinesis Advantage USB