square format M9

[grober]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would be very much in favor of the "golden ratio" rectangle. The M mount's 2:3 is not a golden ratio.

 

Golden ratio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

JC

 

I stand properly chastized. JC is quite right.

 

-g

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[zapp]

square format sensors are open for discussion again. It's advantage: never turn your camera in some kind of sub-optimal position for that low-light portrait and optimal use of the image circle produced by the lens.

Now we're not necessarily sticked to Barnack's choice anymore is the future open for 'better' or other formats in M-rangefinder photography?

Any Mamiya 6 user who wants to respond? (I know, after 6 came 7)

 

Harald

As long as we are still lurking for full frame sensors and always looking for the ever larger sensor, it does not make much sense to go to a square format. Square format is interesting when you can afford to cut off 30% the image later. Right now we still want to use as many pixels as possible, because we pay a price for the extra 30%. This is more important than not having to rotate the camera. Get a rotatable camera back, this is the best you can do these days. If you are happy with a square format, just crop your current 3/2 ratio images - you would not do that because you lose angle of view and a lot of pixels. Mamiya 6 is out, Mamiya 7 is not square. I like playing with the Alpa 12, rotate the back if you like, no need for square sensors.

[HaraldL]

As long as we are still lurking for full frame sensors and always looking for the ever larger sensor, it does not make much sense to go to a square format. Square format is interesting when you can afford to cut off 30% the image later. Right now we still want to use as many pixels as possible, because we pay a price for the extra 30%. This is more important than not having to rotate the camera. Get a rotatable camera back, this is the best you can do these days. If you are happy with a square format, just crop your current 3/2 ratio images - you would not do that because you lose angle of view and a lot of pixels. Mamiya 6 is out, Mamiya 7 is not square. I like playing with the Alpa 12, rotate the back if you like, no need for square sensors.

Sensors will become cheaper. How about a square or round sensor, a retangle image with electronically rotatable framelines in the viewfinder? With the switch for portrait or landscape orientation on your right thumb?

 

Harald

[Irakly Shanidze]

As long as we are still lurking for full frame sensors and always looking for the ever larger sensor, it does not make much sense to go to a square format. Square format is interesting when you can afford to cut off 30% the image later.

 

 

bullocks. square format is interesting in itself. it provides a unique possibility of a visual conflict between dynamic composition and static properties of a square frame.

[LJL]

bullocks. square format is interesting in itself. it provides a unique possibility of a visual conflict between dynamic composition and static properties of a square frame.

 

Irakly,

From the artistic side, I agree with you very much. I find myself cropping more and more toward something more sqaure for more interesting perspectives of things.

 

That being said, however, they (meaning media printers, producers, etc.) are still too locked into the more rectangular views of things. The more odd part to me is that books and magazines tend to have the rectangle in the vertical while cameras have it in the horizontal. The latest push toward widescreen viewing of movies and stuff is also having an increased effect on more rectangular (16:9) prespectives.

 

So what is "correct"? The eyes, in "normal" stereoscopic vision tend toward a more rectangular filed of view. However, it is just that change in format to square that sometimes makes things so much more interesting to view. Throwing away 30% of the image in a crop is bothersome, but hey, we did it all the time with film Hassies and other cameras to accomodate other's printing, display and viewing needs.

 

I tend to think that the horizontal format provides more total usable area for capture. However, I still like the option of cropping to square when I want or need to. If I started with square, I would already be giving up more than I want in a small format camera when I go to print. Then the MF formats are more suitable, but less "spontaneous".

 

From a manufacturing perspective with sensors, there does seem to be less "waste" to create rectangular shaped sensors from the circular wafer blanks, that also yields that all too important megapixel yield. There is definitely a conflict in how an image is rendered from a lens, circular, and thus more similar to a square, than a rectangle.

 

For me, I just want quality of the image in the pixels, and the freedom to crop or not as I see the need. I will tend toward more pixels if they are higher quality, and not just more because they can be crammed onto an odd format.

 

LJ

[photoworkplace]

I am not a "collected" photographer, but I have had the opportunity to have a number of shows that were well received.

One such show was shot with a half frame camera on mostly 3200 film.

All of my cameras were masked at the film plane to give me a square.

I mixed all my own film developers, and worked very hard to get the largest tonal range and greatest accutance one could get out of the film that was possible.

I could not tell you how many people would come up to me and say "Oh! you shoot Hassleblad"

Now these were 10" sqs and there was no hiding the grain

If people like an image they don't look at it and say "Oh that would have been better with a Full Frame Image Sensor"

If they like it they like it

When I shoot weddings I have used Nikon coolpixs and more recently the Fuji F10 If the Bride likes an image she doesn't ask was that made with the MRK2 or the Fuji, and I have printed up to 12" sqs with the Fuji

So! It is my opinion that I would be willing to give up "some" quality for a tool that allows me a greater engagement with the world around me.

The M rangefinder has more often then not allowed that.

Just some quick images to illustrate

Both images shot with the Fuji and the Brides loved them!

Joseph

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!