I've always liked 2:1 aesthetically, in photos and paintings, and wish it was used in movies. There's been such a gap from 1.85:1 to 2.35:1 in movies. But I'd pick 16x9 for a phone. I rarely watch video on mine and use my MacBook or TV for that.
I'm seeing more and more YouTubers using 18:9 (just call it 2:1!) to compromise between 16x9 screens and the newer phones. And Netflix series (House of Cards, Ozark) have done the same, although they probably wouldn't admit to catering to people who watch their shows on a phone.
I guess Apple's thinking on 19.5:9 was to capture the imagination of those thinking of taking panoramic photos or making "cinematic" videos more than watch CinemaScope classics on it. [Please don't do that--even at the proper aspect ratio, you'll miss everything from actors' micro expressions to sound FX nuances.] But it's true if you're capturing widescreen video, the oversized iPhone 13s allow you to see more of the detail in what you're capturing...
But that's if you want your phone designed firstly as a camera, and as a panoramic one. Maybe people do.
I'm seeing more and more YouTubers using 18:9 (just call it 2:1!) to compromise between 16x9 screens and the newer phones. And Netflix series (House of Cards, Ozark) have done the same, although they probably wouldn't admit to catering to people who watch their shows on a phone.
I guess Apple's thinking on 19.5:9 was to capture the imagination of those thinking of taking panoramic photos or making "cinematic" videos more than watch CinemaScope classics on it. [Please don't do that--even at the proper aspect ratio, you'll miss everything from actors' micro expressions to sound FX nuances.] But it's true if you're capturing widescreen video, the oversized iPhone 13s allow you to see more of the detail in what you're capturing...
But that's if you want your phone designed firstly as a camera, and as a panoramic one. Maybe people do.