16:9 Format - Good, bad, or just plain ugly?

[kejago]

Looking at the settings in my new Canon G9, there is the option to choose a 16:9 format. I have not seen this used a lot. Why? Is it too wide? I would be interested in hearing your opinions on this... have you used this format? If not, why not?

This is what it looks like:

http://kejago.smugmug.com/photos/235474741-L.jpg
(Just a snap to illustrate the format)

:ear

[Awais Yaqub]

Hello
I think it is for people who love to play their pictures on 16:9 Television.
I don't use it because if i need such effect i do it on computer.

[darkdragon]

Looking at the settings in my new Canon G9, there is the option to choose a 16:9 format. I have not seen this used a lot. Why? Is it too wide? I would be interested in hearing your opinions on this... have you used this format? If not, why not?



I use the 16:9 format exclusively with my Panasonic LX2. I find it gives me a bit more room when taking photos of tall subjects, which is very handy at times. I purchased the camera specifically because of the 16x9 native sensor. I needed something to quickly snap location and storyboard photos for movie planning (because I shot short films).

:thumb

[xris]

I think it's a great format. I used to shoot it a lot using 120 film and a Linhoff panoramic camera (three frames per roll.)

One possible down side in this case is (I think) you'd be using only about half the G9 image sensor.
:thumb

[largelylivin]

I have restored over 400 photos from 616 negatives that were shot in the 1930's which is 4.5x2.75 (16:9.7) and I after a period of uncertainty I really grew to love it. The reason the film was so large is that it was marketed by Kodak for Contact Prints which, BTW, can be outstanding.

I think that not so many years from now we will start finding 16:9 more normal and the gear will follow suit.

Here's one cropped to 12x8. The original was a better framed photo.

http://blue-dog.smugmug.com/photos/129001446-M-1.jpg

[kejago]

Thank you for the replies. I will give 16:9 a chance... and see how it turns out. I still have to go see how it works on the street. Let the experiments begin... :thumb

[BikePilot]

Post up how it works. I tried out a lx2 and really liked the format, but its sensor is actually 16:9 format. I'm afraid that with a standard format sensor, all the 16:9 mode does is vertically crop it (so you don't get any more width than standard format), but I could be wrong.

have fun

[kejago]

So, as an experiment, I took a little walk down to the lakefront in GEneva before I went home. These are the 1st night shots I have taken with the G9... and I do need a tripod. These were hand held, while leaning against or on something.

Anyway, I think 16:9 works well for street photography. As long is it framed horizontally. As soon as you go vertical, it looks a bet weird, no? Or is that something one just needs to get used to?

(I was just about to paste links... but SmugMug is currently not available. :scratch I'll edit this and add them a bit later...)

[kejago]

16:9 works well for subjects that are a bit long, like cars:

http://kejago.smugmug.com/photos/243277659-L.jpg

Or buildings:

http://kejago.smugmug.com/photos/238088550-L.jpg

Seems to work ok for "long subjects":

http://kejago.smugmug.com/photos/243276921-L.jpg


Horizontal candids:

http://kejago.smugmug.com/photos/243277108-L.jpg

But looks a bit weird to me when you go vertical:

http://kejago.smugmug.com/photos/243277154-XL.jpg

http://kejago.smugmug.com/photos/243277411-XL.jpg

What do you think? :dunno

Opinions please... :ear

[largelylivin]

The Pentax K20D will be 16:9 which is something that I'm really looking forward to.

Here's some 1930's photos that were taken on 615 film which Kodac developed specifically for making contact prints plus, the only place that you could get one enlarged was at a Kodak shop. The negatives were 4.5x2.5 which is 16:8.8. While some of these have been cropped a tad, the original framing was so good that to force them into one of today's standard formated would be a sin.

Looks like the 1st and 3rd pairs were taken in 120 format. Decided to leave for sake of comparison.

http://blue-dog.smugmug.com/photos/57030850-S.jpg http://blue-dog.smugmug.com/photos/127507140-S-2.jpg



http://blue-dog.smugmug.com/photos/56577969-S.jpg http://blue-dog.smugmug.com/photos/132011418-S.jpg

http://blue-dog.smugmug.com/photos/56577968-S.jpg http://blue-dog.smugmug.com/photos/131827873-S.jpg




http://blue-dog.smugmug.com/photos/56659249-S.jpg http://blue-dog.smugmug.com/photos/128240679-S-1.jpg