mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
Before getting to my dilemma, I'll acknowledge that it's been a long time since I've been around here 
Work, work, work, work, work. Something I hope I'm in the process of solving (🤞), giving me time to get back into photography (at least more than I've had recent chance to).
Coinciding with this, I look like coming into some money with attached instructions to "spend it on something self-indulgent". That led me to think of photography as a possible use for some of the funds, and to think of what I might like but would be unlikely to 'rationally' buy. Which made me think of dedicated monochrome digital cameras. Buying such a thing would meet the "self-indulgent" requirement: while I like black and white photography, the idea of a camera that can only take black and white photos does seem a little outré, and something I'd talk myself out of in most circumstances. Except maybe this one.
The trouble is, there are plenty of other things I could indulge myself with, that don't involve an admittedly quirky camera choice.
And it's not as if I can't convert colour photos to black and white. Here are a few sample shots I took recently, with a deliberate view to monochrome conversion, in the past few days:
(I don't know if the conversions suit anyone else's tastes, but they suit mine well enough.)
I'm well aware of all the for-and-against arguments around "seeing in black and white" if you're not carrying colour-capable equipment, and I accept that (at least at the margin) file quality from a dedicated monochrome camera can be higher than conversion from an equivalent colour-capable system. I'm also aware of the trade-offs between less post-processing time if you don't have to hand-manage the conversion versus the near-infinite variety of possible conversions from colour via mixing channels and colours.
I'll also note that I have no particular need for yet another colour-capable digital camera - I have plenty of those, which do me just fine. (So I'm not just looking for an excuse to buy another camera: it's either a pure monochrome one or no additional camera at all.)
I'm also not looking for anyone to solve my (self-made) dilemma for me. At the moment I'm inclining 60:40 towards being self-indulgent and buying a pure monochrome camera regardless.
But I very much would be interested if anyone has compelling reasons to yell "don't do it; you'll be sorry; .." etc.
While I'm happy enough to be self-indulgent, I really don't want to be stupid about it. If I'm about to (probably) do something stupid then please tell me 🙏
...Mike
Work, work, work, work, work. Something I hope I'm in the process of solving (🤞), giving me time to get back into photography (at least more than I've had recent chance to).
Coinciding with this, I look like coming into some money with attached instructions to "spend it on something self-indulgent". That led me to think of photography as a possible use for some of the funds, and to think of what I might like but would be unlikely to 'rationally' buy. Which made me think of dedicated monochrome digital cameras. Buying such a thing would meet the "self-indulgent" requirement: while I like black and white photography, the idea of a camera that can only take black and white photos does seem a little outré, and something I'd talk myself out of in most circumstances. Except maybe this one.
The trouble is, there are plenty of other things I could indulge myself with, that don't involve an admittedly quirky camera choice.
And it's not as if I can't convert colour photos to black and white. Here are a few sample shots I took recently, with a deliberate view to monochrome conversion, in the past few days:
(I don't know if the conversions suit anyone else's tastes, but they suit mine well enough.)
I'm well aware of all the for-and-against arguments around "seeing in black and white" if you're not carrying colour-capable equipment, and I accept that (at least at the margin) file quality from a dedicated monochrome camera can be higher than conversion from an equivalent colour-capable system. I'm also aware of the trade-offs between less post-processing time if you don't have to hand-manage the conversion versus the near-infinite variety of possible conversions from colour via mixing channels and colours.
I'll also note that I have no particular need for yet another colour-capable digital camera - I have plenty of those, which do me just fine. (So I'm not just looking for an excuse to buy another camera: it's either a pure monochrome one or no additional camera at all.)
I'm also not looking for anyone to solve my (self-made) dilemma for me. At the moment I'm inclining 60:40 towards being self-indulgent and buying a pure monochrome camera regardless.
But I very much would be interested if anyone has compelling reasons to yell "don't do it; you'll be sorry; .." etc.
While I'm happy enough to be self-indulgent, I really don't want to be stupid about it. If I'm about to (probably) do something stupid then please tell me 🙏
...Mike
Freakscene
Obscure member
You conversions look great. Much better than mine.
i use monochrome for my personal photography almost 100%. The Leica Monochroms and Pentax K-3 iii Monochrome have enabled that. It is much, much, much easier to work in B&W for me if I start with B&W.
I’ve been looking for an excuse to go to Sydney. If I do, we can catch up and you can try these cameras.
A random selection below.
Marty
i use monochrome for my personal photography almost 100%. The Leica Monochroms and Pentax K-3 iii Monochrome have enabled that. It is much, much, much easier to work in B&W for me if I start with B&W.
I’ve been looking for an excuse to go to Sydney. If I do, we can catch up and you can try these cameras.
A random selection below.
Marty
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
Thanks Marty, you're very kind
And do catch up if you're along Sydney way. In my current state of (semi-) retirement, I should be able to meet up at your choice of time and place if I'm in town myself.
...Mike
P.S. And, of course, you've shown some very nice photos there 👏
And do catch up if you're along Sydney way. In my current state of (semi-) retirement, I should be able to meet up at your choice of time and place if I'm in town myself.
...Mike
P.S. And, of course, you've shown some very nice photos there 👏
pyeh
Member of good standing
Mike, wonderful to see you here again. It's been a long time.
I have an M9 monochrom you are very welcome to try out. But on the other hand it would be great to meet Marty in Sydney.
I have an M9 monochrom you are very welcome to try out. But on the other hand it would be great to meet Marty in Sydney.
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
pixie79
Established
If it is self-indulgent, just get it and you do not have ton rationalize with anyone.
Depending on HOW self-indulgent, select the one that fits the money for free.
Depending on HOW self-indulgent, select the one that fits the money for free.
Freakscene
Obscure member
M10M, 50/1.4 ASPH.
Freakscene
Obscure member
Typ 246, recoated rigid Summicron.
Freakscene
Obscure member
MM, 75mm Summilux.
You could always split the $... buy two things. The Pentax K3 Monochrome goes for $2199 and you can buy a few awesome (and small) lenses for less than $500 each.
JeffS7444
Well-known
Back when I was still shooting with the Leica M9, I had a chance to try the original M Monochrom. And unsurprisingly, handling was pretty much identical. Back at home, comparing results of the two as processed in Adobe's Lightroom ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Godfrey
somewhat colored
A brilliant photo!
I'd wanted a Leica monochrom since the first one was announced, finally bought the M10 Monochrom in '22. It is just a stunning camera and a delight to work with. Indulgent? ... Well, I guess that depends on what drives your photography. After I'd been using it long enough, I decided I wanted the color version of the same thing, sold my CL, and bought a used M10-R to complement it. They're the basis of most of my photography now, when I'm not shooting Polaroid or other film.
The M10-M gets more than half of my use.
Bush & Pickets - Santa Clara 2023
Leica M10 Monochrom + Pentax SMC-L 43mm f/1.8 Special
ISO 160 @ f/3.4 @ 1/90
G
Last edited:
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
The mirrorless cameras will allow you to see in mono even when the camera is set to shoot RAW only. The RAW file will be in color when put on the computer and you can set it to show the camera monochrome version in your post processing program. I find this helps me compose, my skills at that are feeble. Something to consider if you don't want to be limited.
Bill Blackwell
Leica M Shooter
Regardless of how rich the colors are in my images, easily 90% of my pics get converted to B&W - and I usually prefer it that way. Even so, I can't justify the cost of an M10M to the resident boss. If I were starting with nothing though (or if/when my M10-P gives up the ghost), I'd go for an M0 or 11 mono.
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
The way you have presented those leaves, they seem almost to glow in a range of tones. Wish I could get foliage in my images to do that. Nicely done.A brilliant photo!
I'd wanted a Leica monochrom since the first one was announced, finally bought the M10 Monochrom in '22. It is just a stunning camera and a delight to work with. Indulgent? ... Well, I guess that depends on what drives your photography. After I'd been using it long enough, I decided I wanted the color version of the same thing, sold my CL, and bought a used M10-R to complement it. They're the basis of most of my photography now, when I'm not shooting Polaroid or other film.
Bush & Pickets - Santa Clara 2023
Leica M10 Monochrom + Pentax SMC-L 43mm f/1.8 Special
ISO 160 @ f/3.4 @ 1/90
G
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
Like film, how the image is processed is as much a factor if not more so responsible for the character of the image. I find Silver Effex a big help in getting the look I want.
agentlossing
Well-known
Using a screen in monochrome is overrated. Every famous B&W photographer used his or her brain to see in monochrome, and it provides a way to engage in a less reactive, more creative process with the world. Then, on the technical side, a properly exposed monochrome image isn't going to show well in live view, because the dynamic range isn't going to be shown in a live view readout as you'll want it to appear in the final image. Shadows will probably look much too dark, so you won't be able to compose for the darker areas very well.
maddoc
... likes film again.
My approach to your dilemma (correct term?) would be to honestly check the percentage of BW work you do. In my case for example, I have maybe taken over 1000 rolls of BW film in the last 17 yrs (since I took up photography again and using Leica cameras after arriving in Japan) compared to about 50 rolls of color film. When the M9 Monochrome was announced, my first reaction was "That is the digital rangefinder camera to go for! This could replace BW film for my needs". I then had the chance to borrow a friend's M10 Monochrome a couple of times and to compare it to the experience of shooting BW film. To make things short, I was neither convinced by the handling of the camera nor the results that I got with it. The lenses that I used, all older pre-ASPH Leica era or weird stuff like the Jupiter lenses, showed their optical shortcomings very well with the high resolution sensor of the Monochrome. I liked the results on film with those lenses, though. To fully enjoy the capabilities of this beast, I would have had to invest into a few more modern lenses as well was my conclusion. Instead, I went with the Fujifilm XPro3 and some older Fujinon lenses. The results I get with some of the monochrome emulations are much closer to what I got from BW film with my Leica cameras and the handling of the camera fits my needs better (adjustable VF diopter!). Given the price tag of the Monochrome, I would think very hard about buying one from my experience.
Freakscene
Obscure member
The K-3 iii M is a good choice, with the proviso that to get along with the K-3 iii M you need to like SLRs and be willing to engage with a (potentially new) complicated user interface. I bought (so far!) the 15, 21, 35 and 70mm HD Pentax Limiteds for much less than the cost of one used Leica lens. The design approach and performance aims are different to Leica, but I like them a lot, particularly the 35 and 70mms.You could always split the $... buy two things. The Pentax K3 Monochrome goes for $2199 and you can buy a few awesome (and small) lenses for less than $500 each.
Oh, and that you can get one. I gather they are very thin on the ground.
And (draw breath) given your ‘shaken, so blurred’, you’ll find that the implementation of vibration reduction in the Pentax really helps for hand held photography. You can photograph anything you can see (which is less than with the Leica . . . ).
Last edited: