Anyone who has issues with using a "square format" sensor should buy a Hasselblad 500 series camera with an 80, 120 or 150mm lens, 10 rolls of Provia 100f or Velvia 100, and shoot at least 2 photos a day for 2 months. By the time those two months are up, you'll be wondering why every camera doesn't have a square sensor (with a landscape/ portrait crop option, for those few occasions where that works better). Guaranteed...
I do not have problem with the squre format. However, I do want to point out why Hasselblad (also Rollieflex and other copies) is using a square format. The penta prism for Hasslblad (Rollieflex also) is extremely heavy and expensive. so It it not an option for most of the users. Waist level view finder is the norm for the users. So can you imagine people using it side way??? The squre format will eliminate the rotaion of the camera body.
Back to the arguement about "Standard height to width ration". There is no standard. However, human vision do have more width than height, it is about 3:2, individual milage may vary. That is why the movie industry set this standard at the beginning and Leica adopted it since day one and evey body follows. TV has been using 4:3 for a long time. Movies has been using wide screen for a long time also. DH TV has moved away from 4:3. So what is the right ratio???
The only thing that we will give up in square format is the angle of view in the horizotal direction. For any given lens, it will be narrower.
There are people agrue that with square format ( based on existing FF lens) will have less usable sensor area. It nay not be the case. Let us use 8 X 10 print as a case for discussion. For a FF, an 8 X10 will use 24mm X 30mm area of the sensor. on a quare 30mm X 30mm sensor, it will stil use 30mm X 24mm. Exactly the same! For 12 X14 print, 24mm x 28mm will be used from FF. It is actually smaller than the 30mm X 25.7 mm from the 30mm square sensor.