Latest or all posts or last 15, 30, 90 or 180 days.
Handpicked deals...

$388.95 $287.82
SAVE $101

Get up to 16x more storage and 2x the speeds of the original drive
Sony A7R IV

Please order through this ad, thanks!
Ordering through BH Photo email notice will not give me credit and you know my review will be good!
Buy at B&H via site links to support Lloyd’s reporting!
√ B&H Photo PAYS THE SALES TAX FOR YOU More info...

Micro Four Thirds vs APS-C: Aspect Ratio

See yesterday’s discussion in Micro Four Thirds: Withering on the Vine, plus Micro Four Thirds vs APS-C: Size and Weight Realities, or search for Micro Four Thirds.

Reader Herve L points out that image aspect ratio might be a deciding factor for some users. DSLR cameras have 3:2 sensors, but M4/3 has a 4:3 aspect ratio (which also helps in keeping lens size down, square format being most efficient at this).

I am not a proponent of any fixed aspect ratio (what a silly argument), having shot 4X 5, 6X17 and 6X7 and 35mm and so on. Each has its merits, but I am used to the 3:2 aspect ratio of a DSLR, which is also the same for APS-C and the Sony RX100 oddball size. I think it works best in most cases. And with modern printing, I crop to whatever feels right—rare but no hangups there.

Micro Four Thirds is a 4:3 aspect ratio. If one wishes to make 3:2 images, then the M4/3 sensor is effectively even smaller as it will have to be cropped. On the other hand a 20 X 16 print has to be cropped from a DSLR, but that is why I would make a 24 X 16.

Either way, making a fixed demand about the aspect ratio does influence the sensor size difference: cropping APS-C to 4:3 yields a 20.9 X 15.7 mm sensor, which is 46% larger than M4/3: still significant.

Sensor sizes vary in aspect ratio

Our trusted photo rental store

diglloyd Inc. | FTC Disclosure | PRIVACY POLICY | Trademarks | Terms of Use
Contact | About Lloyd Chambers | Consulting | Photo Tours
RSS Feeds | Twitter
Copyright © 2019 diglloyd Inc, all rights reserved.