Should I shoot in 4/3 or 3/2 assuming I crop in post-processing?

[Balinus]

Hello!

1st post here

As the title suggest I want to know what would be best between shooting (Panasonic GH2) in the native 4/3 aspect ratio or in the 3/2 aspect ratio. The native ratio boost the maximum resolution (~16MP vs 14MP for 3/2). Since 2-3 weeks I began shooting in RAW as we weren't happy with the JPEG rendering of the GH2. So, I told myself: should I shoot in 4/3 and then crop in a 3/2 aspect ratio for prints?

Would that yield any benefits in terms of quality? or would that only mean that I have access to a bigger (i.e. wider?) image?

Thanks a lot guys!
Balinus

 

[fjrabon]

all shooting in 3/2 in camera does is crops it to that ratio.

If you end up cropping to 3/2 every time anyway, it literally doesn't matter if you start in 4/3 or shoot in 3/2 in camera, sure it lowers your resolution if you shoot in 3/2, but it does so in THE SAME EXACT WAY as when you crop in post. WHen you change the crop ratio, your camera selects the largest image it can take with that crop ratio.

So, from an image quality standpoint, it literally doesn't matter if you crop in camera or in post. It does the same thing. It's just a matter of if you want the option of having the extra parts in frame, or if you want to save time in post processing.

I tend to shoot in the aspect ratio I plan on the final image being, as it helps me better visualize the composition.

 

[Balinus]

Thanks, that's clearer now!

Having the extra parts in frame might be interesting as I find that I crop 90% of my photos... though your comment about the composition is also something to consider.

I'll try to shoot in 4/3 for a couple of days and see how that goes.

Thanks again!

 

[3Ddeath]

Ignoring the specific cameras you mentioned and going by theroy...
It really depends on the quality of the sensor, you could have a 24 megapixel camera with a super tiny sensor the size of my contact lens, which means you'll get a large image file but be really crappy quality, were as the cropped image from a quality sensor would still be good quality

 

[jaomul]

4/3 ratio will use all the sensor in your camera allowing you to crop from max image size, if you go 3/2 your cropping in camera and re-cropping later.

 

[brunerww]

Hello!

1st post here

As the title suggest I want to know what would be best between shooting (Panasonic GH2) in the native 4/3 aspect ratio or in the 3/2 aspect ratio. The native ratio boost the maximum resolution (~16MP vs 14MP for 3/2). Since 2-3 weeks I began shooting in RAW as we weren't happy with the JPEG rendering of the GH2. So, I told myself: should I shoot in 4/3 and then crop in a 3/2 aspect ratio for prints?

Would that yield any benefits in terms of quality? or would that only mean that I have access to a bigger (i.e. wider?) image?

Thanks a lot guys!
Balinus

Hi Balinus,

Because of the GH2's multi-aspect sensor, you lose less resolution going from 4:3 to 3:2 than with conventional sensors. The sensor crops from approximately 15.9MP to 15MP, so there is not that much difference when you change the aspect ratio in-camera (see this explanation).

Hope this is helpful,

Bill

 

[Balinus]

Thank! Good complement!