Mono - not the illness

[Bill Pierce]

With the introduction of the Leica Q2 Monochrom, there seems to be a burst of interest in monochrome only cameras. It seems centered on the improved definition of the monochromatic sensor. The cost of the Leica Q and M monochrome cameras is such that for most the interest is in looking at 100 per cent comparison images on the internet rather than buying the cameras. That’s understandable. And, sure enough, the monochromatic cameras show a little higher definition than their color counterparts. But my opinion, and it is an opinion, not an undeniable absolute truth, that this is not the reason to use a monochrome camera unless you enjoy viewing large prints from distance of a foot or less. I’m not sure the difference is significant outside of that. And for those of us where a little misfocus, camera movement or shooting at a less than optimum f/stop takes the edge off image quality, it certainly isn’t.

I think you use a Monochrom as a form of discipline. You concentrate on form and the moment because that’s all you’ve got. I’ve got to admit, the viewfinder on my digital cameras is almost always set to black-and-white for that reason. But, I’m saving a color raw file. Yes, most often it’s going to end up as a black-and-white print. And, no, the ability to simulate the effect of colored filters on black-and-white film is not an overwhelming reason to shoot color raw - except for that exceptionally rare occasion when it is. The big reason is that although I love black-and-white, some images are better in color, and I usually find that out after I shoot them.

BTW, if you think I am an idiot and if you are interested in purchasing other brands of cameras having monochromatic sensors or having the sensors placed in a variety of cameras from Fuji, Nikon, Panasonic and Sony converted, check out

https://maxmax.com/maincamerapage/monochrome-cameras.

The MaxMax prices make monochrome more affordable.

I can absolutely appreciate the commitment and discipline by a photographer who truly knows what he wants and uses a camera with a monochromatic sensor. I am just not of that far along. Your thoughts?

 

[xayraa33]

Oh why not a dedicated monochrome digital camera?

With the short life-span of most consumer grade digital cameras, a specialised digital camera that is made solely for quality B&W is a great idea, and would not go out of date as fast.

Now if the main Japanese brands can make good and affordable monochrome digital cameras then we really would have something to celebrate about.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

And, sure enough, the monochromatic cameras show a little higher definition than their color counterparts. But my opinion, and it is an opinion, not an undeniable absolute truth, that this is not the reason to use a monochrome camera unless you enjoy viewing large prints from distance of a foot or less.

For me (Kostya) Leica M Monochrome shows way above resolution comparing to regular BW conversions.

Just as for these guys:
https://maxmax.com/b&w_conversion.htm

I don't need to go over-printing to see it clearly. Just have to enlarge full sized picture 1:1 at my screen. 1:1 view is my fetish.

But Q-M... who knows, Leica is known for screwing it and badly.

 

[Richard G]

I think you’re right. The discipline, and freedom from even considering colour. And this:

Mine is in for free sensor replacement at almost 5 years. The camera is magic. It is different to film. I still shoot black and white film. If I had to choose it would be the Monochrom. It is like pushing Tri-X 2-3 stops and getting Plus X negatives. It is like medium format tonal subtlety at base ISO. The detail is sometimes astonishing. The shutter is smoother and quieter than my M9-P. I had to have it. I have to keep it.

 

[nikon_sam]

I started out back in high school using only Black & White...I loved it...my Senior year our teacher bought an E-6 set of chemistry and film...I went out and shot a roll of film or two...after developing it I thought I did something wrong...the wonderful colors I was hoping to see weren't there...after looking at the results for a few days I noticed I was thinking B&W while shooting color...my images LACKED color because I wasn't shooting those nice bright colors...
I love shooting both Color and B&W...there are times I go out looking to shoot one or the other...
Many times I find I'm totally wrong in my original thinking...what I think will work in color works better in mono...sometimes it goes the other way around...
I love that I can change my mind with the cameras I currently own...
The image below would work both ways...I only shot it in mono...

 

[farlymac]

I'm not quite ready for a dedicated b&w only camera. It's a lot of money to tie up in something that will not get as much use. But that is my perspective on the subject matter, and if I was into doing a lot of street photography it could be a good argument for owning a monochrome model. Or if I was getting paid for my photography. Or I get lucky on the Lottery and don't care what the mono only cost is.

I do like shooting in mono. Sometimes color just won't do the scene justice.



Our Busy Little Hill by P F McFarland, on Flickr


PF

 

[Dogman]

It's tempting but they're out of my price range--Leica and the MaxMax conversions both. But a mono only X100S or X-Pro2 sounds very interesting.

The majority of what I shoot is B&W. Probably 75% or more B&W, 25% or less color. I'm pretty happy with what I'm getting right now. But I can see the attraction of a monochrome only camera. If I had more money to play with, I would certainly give one a try.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Best mono is BW film on darkroom print.

 

[Freakscene]

B&W is about tonality, whatever internet obsessed folk say about resolution.

The Leica monochrom cameras have fantastic tones. This is the original MM with a 50/2.

Marty

 

[Richard G]

Beautiful Marty. That’s the camera. Here’s my favourite from it.

 

[Ccoppola82]

Interesting and timely for myself. I just grabbed a mint 246 for a steal and almost immediately sold my mp240. My experience is this;

My mp240 frustrated me because color offered TOO MANY creative options which is akin to a painter using too many pigments (I’m also an oil painter). While I didn’t find the BW images BAD, in fact up to iso 1250ish they were perfectly fine. I came to realize that I had virtually no interest in color other than family snapshots which I can use my phone or aging xpro2 for.

Enter the 246. I got it not really thinking it would be that much different than the 240 and I would end up selling it, but I had to see for myself. I was incorrect. Most notably the ISO is ridiculous and I can easily shoot usable images into 6400 and even higher if need be. The thing I noticed which I was not really looking for is that processing seemed to give me 2-3x the greys to work with which allowed REAL fine tuning of an image that the 240 just didnt have. Not sure how to describe that actually, other than perhaps imagining maybe thread count in sheets or something. Like the lower thread counts when stretched become see-through and "fall apart" where the higher count will remain intact. I plan on building the equipment to do platinum palladium printing from files from the 246 or even contact printing in my darkroom. Unsure thus far.

While it is hands down my favorite digital camera I’ve ever owned, it’s downfall is still in highlight retention (like most digital) but this is easily compensated for by metering the highlights at +2 and lifting shadows in post, literally the opposite of when I shoot film. Also, film does something which no digital has done for me in that it captures atmosphere in its own special way, but I have no film that I can shoot at 6400 or 12,500 and get an image.

Just my 2 cents. Or maybe that was 3 cents.

 

[brusby]

I plan on building the equipment to do platinum palladium printing from files from the 246 or even contact printing in my darkroom.

Contact printing from the 246? Or were you referring to large format negatives?

 

[Freakscene]

Contact printing from the 246? Or were you referring to large format negatives?

This is what I do, print the Monochrom images as negatives on an inkjet and then contact print on silver chloride or hand-coated paper. Standard size is 9x13.5 on 11x15 paper, but I can go up to 16x24. They look amazing.

Marty

 

[Out to Lunch]

All the power to those willing to spend $6,000 on a fixed lens camera. In comparison with, let's say a Fuji X-100V, it's like paying $250 for a meal at a two-star Michelin restaurant, instead of eating really well at home. Cheers, OtL

 

[Ricoh]

It’s a matter of fact that photography is an abstraction (of the real world, ie 2D rather than 3D). B&W adds to the effect making it more obvious.
Of course I’d love a Leica Monochrome but changing from my M240 is on the back burner given I have a number of film cameras allowing me to change the sensor as I wish.
PS Just added an FM3a and I’m loving it! Almost like an M7 but better in some regards, even if it’s not a rangefinder. But I have an M6 as well.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Nikon made a prototype monochrome Df using the version of sensor used in their O-Scope camera. The color and monochrome version of the o-Scope camera cost the same. Too bad they did not bring out the Df-M.

I've had my M Monochrom for 8 years now. Typically bring the M9 and M Monochrom out together. I've shot them side-by-side and have converted the M9 to B&W to compare differences. The files from the monochrome camera do not have artifacts introduced by the demosaic process, which is most pronounced when using a deep-yellow (Y48), Orange, and Red filter.

The big advantage- I like selecting a contrast filter and lens ahead of time and spending less time post-processing.

 

[JeffS7444]

There seems to be no shortage of people and products which promise more thoughtful, deliberate life experiences, but I wonder if it'd be better to train one's mind to be more fully present in the moment than to pay top dollar for de-featured consumer electronics?

I'd agree with the idea of capturing RGB data, because even if final output is monochrome, with color data intact we can alter tonal values in ways which are much trickier with a monochrome file.

 

[Vince Lupo]

I had both the M9M as well as the M246 and was an early adopter of both and have made a lot of prints from both, and quite honestly I didn't notice a massive difference between images I printed from either one of those and my M-D 262 (and I've exhibited images from all three side-by-side), though I did notice a difference with black and white prints from my M9 in the highlights and at higher ISO's. I've also noticed that the black and white prints I've gotten from my Nikon Z7 and now the Hasselblad 907x are pretty much as good as most anything that came out of either one of my Monochroms, though it's still early days with both of them. So really doesn't make too much difference to me, though I'm definitely curious about the Q2 and M10M.

As far as the viewfinder being black and white goes, that personally doesn't make much difference to me either. My viewfinders are always in colour when I shoot black and white film, so for me it's not a real advantage either way.

A few years back when the Leica SL came out, I did a two-week side-by-side comparison between it and the M246 (the thread is somewhere here on RFF). One thing I did find was that compared to the 246, the SL showed an amazing amount of shadow detail, and the images and prints were really something to see. At the time, however, I couldn't really get on with the EVF, so I stuck with the 246. How my perception has since changed 🙂

 

[Timmyjoe]

For many years I lusted for one of the original Leica M9 Monochrom cameras. Finally got one a couple years ago with a bad sensor. Luckily Leica was still replacing them so I got a new sensor put in it. Love the way it renders, but I rarely take it out when I'm shooting because I spend a lot of time in not great environments, and I worry about introducing moisture into the camera body when I change lenses, leading to the new sensor corroding. So it doesn't get used much.

I would have loved for Nikon to make the rumored Df-M, as I would trust Nikon to make the camera and sensor robust, like my current Df, and I would have no fear taking that camera out to shoot in the world. Also, I still have a bevy of Nikkors from the days of shooting Tri-X that would be pretty sweet to use with a Monochrom sensor.

Best,
-Tim

 

[agentlossing]

I don't fully get the appeal of monochrome-only sensors. Sensors are so good these days that the slight added resolution seems like it's not the most necessary feature, I guess the limitation aspect of it is really the selling feature. But digital CMOS sensors also don't have a lot of character, compared to the variety you can get from B&W film stocks, development processes, etc. It seems restrictive, not so much in the "creative restrictions" way as just restrictive of the type of output you can get. I suppose monochrome sensors work with color filters like B&W film, so at least that's a positive creative option. I would probably stick an orange filter on much of the time, and shoot wide open at higher ISO.