Best Monochrome Options 2025 - Leica? Converted Files? Converted Cameras?

[Benjamin Marks]

@Freakscene - Those pictures are such an eloquent argument for the M11, even at the reduced resolution that the Internet offers. Bravo! Nicely seen -- all of them.

And @Godfrey - nice tonalities!

 

[Freakscene]

I often think about what it would be like to have a full-frame monochrome sensor, and I am sure the Leicas have an edge on my Pentax. But strictly in terms of what can a monochrome sensor offer you, the Pentax offers a lot.

Having had all the Monochroms and the Pentax, plus some arcane things like the Kodak DCS monochrome dSLRs, the only material downsides I see to the Pentax is that is an SLR and that it has a complicated interface. ‘Full frame’ is not much of an issue with the Pentax viewfinder, unless you are swapping back and forth with a Nikon D5 or D6 or other brand equivalent. The modern Pentax lens ranges are anaemic in APS-C and 24x36, and all the old lenses work just fine, with different but equivalent trade-offs on both. But the “I need full frame” mindset or little voice in your head, I understand that.

Speaking of little voices, one other plus for monochrome digital cameras over both film and digital colour conversions - large areas of even tone are quite simple to handle. I often find that unless film has been rotary processed, that I can see some (even if tiny) tonal variations that are from processing in some frames, and that colour sensors, especially PDAF sensors, have some pattern noise that is obvious and is also hard to handle.

 

[agentlossing]

The biggest thing is mindset. Do you want to take monochrome photos and get into the mindsetof taking only monochrome photos? For me, the potential choice is problematic, and seeing the photos in colour tends to ‘fix’ them in my head in colour. With a black-and-white canera, you never see them that way.

I also (for whatever reason) don't like the visualization of an LCD screen or EVF being in black and white. This is probably just my stubbornness, and possibly a result of shooting black and white film, but I want to see the world in color (non-LCD/EVF, just plain optics without a screen showing me something resembling the end photo), so I can visualize and imagine the way it will look in black and white. As I see it, honing my eye to convert to B&W mentally, and then seeing how I did in the resulting images, is part of the joy of shooting B&W.

 

[agentlossing]

But the “I need full frame” mindset or little voice in your head, I understand that.

Well, I own the K-1, so I don't really feel that way - except maybe to see the edges of the normal 24X36 frame using native 24X36 format Pentax lenses, and to have more useful (AKA wider-angle) view using the same lenses, without the APS-C crops. The only other consideration would be whether there's even more subtlety and tonal range in FF monochrome sensors. But there is so much of both in the K-3 III Monochrome's sensor, I can be happy.

 

[Freakscene]

I also (for whatever reason) don't like the visualization of an LCD screen or EVF being in black and white. This is probably just my stubbornness, and possibly a result of shooting black and white film, but I want to see the world in color (non-LCD/EVF, just plain optics without a screen showing me something resembling the end photo), so I can visualize and imagine the way it will look in black and white. As I see it, honing my eye to convert to B&W mentally, and then seeing how I did in the resulting images, is part of the joy of shooting B&W.

It’s the other way for me, sorry if I was unclear. I want to see the scene in monochrome, to the point where I really like EVFs because that way I only ever see the scenes through the camera in monochrome, and never see it in colour.

I can see all the pages on the Ishihara test, but my brain and colour have never got along. I first recall seeing a black-and-white photo when I was very small and thinking “that’s it!” And I’ve been obsessed since.

 

[shawn]

You get some of the sharpness back but not all of it. Some of the sharpness comes from the increased amount of light reaching the sensor through not having filtration. These RAW converters also often introduce artefacts that can be hard to deal with.

Actually in the comparisons I did the color camera with raw conversion directly to monochrome was sharper then the actual monochrome version. I posted samples in the Pentax thread and linked to the raw files.

 

[Freakscene]

Actually in the comparisons I did the color camera with raw conversion directly to monochrome was sharper then the actual monochrome version. I posted samples in the Pentax thread and linked to the raw files.

Yes, I saw. I am not sure what the difference was, but I found the opposite when developing raw files from the K-3 iii and K-3 iii Monochrome in Monochrome2DNG. I also did not like some of the artefacts that raw converter introduced to both files. It was like it was exaggerating differences in luminance along sharp edges but that it got them wrong sometimes. “Automatic mosaic pattern suppression” just seems to introduce different problems.

 

[shawn]

The biggest thing is mindset. Do you want to take monochrome photos and get into the mindset of taking only monochrome photos? For me, the potential choice is problematic, and seeing the photos in colour tends to ‘fix’ them in my head in colour. With a black-and-white canera, you never see them that way.

Batch process your raw files directly to monochrome and you don't see the color version either. Set the cameras mode to mono and it will preview anything you shoot as B&W.

 

[shawn]

Yes, I saw. I am not sure what the difference was, but I found the opposite when developing raw files from the K-3 iii and K-3 iii Monochrome in Monochrome2DNG. I also did not like some of the artefacts that raw converter introduced to both files. It was like it was exaggerating differences in luminance along sharp edges but that it got them wrong sometimes. “Automatic mosaic pattern suppression” just seems to introduce different problems.

What program did you use to convert your color RAW files directly to monochrome without demosaicing. Not all software does that.

Why would you use monochrome2DNG with the K-3 III monochrome? That shouldn't be necessary as the files should already be tagged as monochrome. That software is really only for a monochrome converted camera, nothing else.

 

[Freakscene]

Sorry, to be clear, I did a big matrixed experiment with a K-3 iii, a monochrome converted K-3 iii and the K-3 iii Monochrome and a pile of Raw converters. I couldn’t consistently get monochrome files I liked as much as the K-3 iii Monochrome from either of the others by any method. The core problem, as far as I can tell, is that the data libraries that these converters use are less complete than those produced by software developers who get provided software libraries by the equipment manufacturers.

Testing RAW converters has to be the most boring thing I have ever tried to do in photography. I used to like taking a film, developing it to the same CI in 10 different developers and then comparing outputs. There is something about comparing RAW developers that I find truly stultifying, particularly taking the files across multiple monitors. I am sure that I am still better looking at prints.

What program did you use to convert your color RAW files directly to monochrome without demosaicing. Not all software does that.

I tried several. I think I liked RawTherapee with Raw->Demosaicing->method->none settings best, but it still wasn’t great.

Why would you use monochrome2DNG with the K-3 III monochrome? That shouldn't be necessary as the files should already be tagged as monochrome. That software is really only for a monochrome converted camera, nothing else.

I didn’t, sorry. Badly worded.

I found that I prefer the K-3 iii Monochrome output through normal Raw developers ( use Adobe Camera Raw as built in to the up-to-date Lightroom subscription version) better than any other options, across a range of photos. Maybe you find that you prefer something else better, but not for me.

 

[shawn]

I didn’t, sorry. Badly worded.

I found that I prefer the K-3 iii Monochrome output through normal Raw developers ( use Adobe Camera Raw as built in to the up-to-date Lightroom subscription version) better than any other options, across a range of photos. Maybe you find that you prefer something else better, but not for me.

I have 4 raw developers I use. Most of the time it is the current version of Lightroom. Lightroom doesn't do direct monochrome conversions without demosaicing though.

For that I use Iridient Developer. The developer wrote all his own raw processors and sharpening methods and it gives great results. Brian was way ahead of the curve with Fuji xtrans files for example and it also handles Merrill files and has an extended dynamic range monochrome mode in them too. To go straight to B&W without demosaicing you just select that as the raw process.

As an example a raw file at default ...

Then going straight to monochrome without demosaicing...


and showing the detail at 300% zoom.



I used Iridient with the comparison between the K3 color and monochrome raw files.

I use DXO occasionally as it has great film looks, its NR is fantastic, Viewpoint corrections for geometry, and volume anamorphosis.

The last one I use every once in awhile is RPP64 as it has a unique look to it with regards to color. It has an Ektar emulation which is beautiful. Also has looks for prints on different types of paper.

 

[Freakscene]

I have 4 raw developers I use. Most of the time it is the current version of Lightroom. Lightroom doesn't do direct monochrome conversions without demosaicing though.

For that I use Iridient Developer. The developer wrote all his own raw processors and sharpening methods and it gives great results. Brian was way ahead of the curve with Fuji xtrans files for example and it also handles Merrill files and has an extended dynamic range monochrome mode in them too. To go straight to B&W with demosaicing you just select that as the raw process.

As an example a raw file at default ...
View attachment 4869398
Then going straight to monochrome without demosaicing...

View attachment 4869399
and showing the detail at 300% zoom.

View attachment 4869400

I used Iridient with the comparison between the K3 color and monochrome raw files.

I use DXO occasionally as it has great film looks, its NR is fantastic, Viewpoint corrections for geometry, and volume anamorphosis.

The last one I use every once in awhile is RPP64 as it has a unique look to it with regards to color. It has an Ektar emulation which is beautiful. Also has looks for prints on different types of paper.

When I tried Iridient it had a persistent bug with DNG monochrome file loading. I see that this has now been fixed. I may give it a try, those do look good, but likely only the sort of thing you’d see in a large print (which I do make at times, so . . . ).

 

[shawn]

Iridient is definitely worth looking at. If you find a bug contact Brian. I found a couple of obscure bugs. One was with the Pentax monochrome files, other was with the fp L and a crop set in camera causing crashes. He fixed each in about 2 weeks.

 

[Richard G]

It’s the other way for me, sorry if I was unclear. I want to see the scene in monochrome, to the point where I really like EVFs because that way I only ever see the scenes through the camera in monochrome, and never see it in colour.

I can see all the pages on the Ishihara test, but my brain and colour have never got along. I first recall seeing a black-and-white photo when I was very small and thinking “that’s it!” And I’ve been obsessed since.

That is really interesting.

 

[Godfrey]

It’s the other way for me, sorry if I was unclear. I want to see the scene in monochrome, to the point where I really like EVFs because that way I only ever see the scenes through the camera in monochrome, and never see it in colour.

I can see all the pages on the Ishihara test, but my brain and colour have never got along. I first recall seeing a black-and-white photo when I was very small and thinking “that’s it!” And I’ve been obsessed since.

Interesting.

I "found" B&W when I was about 8-9 years old, at first because I couldn't afford—or attempt!—to process color at home. And I fell in love with it because it made the abstraction of photography explicit in my mind ... A photograph was NOT the real thing, and no pretty colors could deceive me otherwise. But since I learned early on how to manipulate tonal relationships with filters, I always like to see the natural color of the original so that I know exactly what I'm filtering out of the scene when I fit my choice of B&W filter correction.

Looking at a B&W LCD with light captured through a filter nets something similar, but I find it isn't as precise as my imagination of the filtered light, probably due to many, many years of previsualization... 🙂

G

 

[jbielikowski]

I like the full control over my BW files that converting color files gives, and with jpg set to BW it's only a split-second I see them in color, right after opening in ACR.
Also the BW from M9 is really nice, same with M240, I have contrast set to low and sharpness turned off.

 

[Bill Blackwell]

I acquired my M11-P while on a search for an M10 Monochrom. I got the M11-P at about the price an M10 Monochrom would have cost me, which was becoming very hard to find in a condition acceptable to me. I also wanted one with a warranty. 20-25% of the time I wish I had the monochrom (these times are when the B&W conversion is discernable to the trained eye), but the rest of the time I'm fully satisfied with the M11-P mono conversions. Below are examples of each.

Leica M11-P, CV 21mm Ultron f/1.8 VM