The Misunderstood Leica Monochrom

If I shot digital, only BW, and had a lot of money, I'd consider the Monochrom, it's a ballsy product, hats off to Leica for making it.

I don't get the 'Inconspicuous' argument in the article though, it's an unusual looking camera which you raise to your eye, increasingly uncommon these days. If you really wanted to fade into the background, you'd use a DSLR, compact, or phone.

I've considered getting a Nikon F5 just so I have a camera which looks like an everyday DSLR, rather than a Rolleiflex which I've had people stare at like they couldn't believe what they were seeing.
 
It's an amazing camera. But I don't understand why it demands such a premium over the Leica M-E. Is it really that expensive to not throw in the Bayer filter for a some short runs? I figure rewriting the software would be a piece of cake. Did it require a different processor?

The Monochrom is my most lusted after camera. But for now, the Sigma Foveon cameras do just fine and offer similar visual acuity. One thing to note: there have been rumors that Sony is putting together a monochrome camera as well. If they do, I'll completely invest in Sony, despite disliking fly-by-wire and EVFs.
 
Samouraï said:
It's an amazing camera. But I don't understand why it demands such a premium over the Leica M-E. Is it really that expensive to not throw in the Bayer filter for a some short runs? I figure rewriting the software would be a piece of cake. Did it require a different processor?

The Monochrom is my most lusted after camera. But for now, the Sigma Foveon cameras do just fine and offer similar visual acuity. One thing to note: there have been rumors that Sony is putting together a monochrome camera as well. If they do, I'll completely invest in Sony, despite disliking fly-by-wire and EVFs.
Click to expand...

The Monochrom will have required development and investment, it all has to be paid for off the back of what is probably extremely low sales.
 
thegman said:
The Monochrom will have required development and investment, it all has to be paid for off the back of what is probably extremely low sales.
Click to expand...

I actually can't see too much being spent on developing the MM...Leica just removed the bayer and IR filter and put a piece of optical glass there instead, right? The chassis and components almost all come from the M9. Tweaking the software to read single pixel luminance data instead of the standard processing algorithm also probably isn't too difficult.

That said, I'd love to have one based on the M type 240...CMOS sensors handle highlight and shadow space better, the creative possibility of such a body would be endless - rich, clean shots made at iso 51,200, for example.
 
thegman said:
The Monochrom will have required development and investment, it all has to be paid for off the back of what is probably extremely low sales.
Click to expand...
Utterly debatable. Monochrome cameras have been in service in the security and defense camera industry for ages.
 
YYV_146 said:
...I'd love to have one based on the M type 240...CMOS sensors handle highlight and shadow space better, the creative possibility of such a body would be endless - rich, clean shots made at iso 51,200, for example.
Click to expand...
My view is that Leica doesn't need to mess with the M-Monochrom's CCD sensor, unless procurement of this type of sensor becomes difficult in the future. First, one doesn't need ISO 51,200 unless one is into surveillance photography. Second, while M-Monchrom shots at ISO 5,000 and ISO 10,000 can look great, the dynamic range at this speed becomes very narrow, which is can be an important concern as the lighting is often very high contrast in these situations, which can make getting the "right" exposure hit or miss. My own preference is to shoot at ISO 1,250 and push in Lighroom 5 — same technique as the ISO 640 technique for the M9 — this also preserves highlights, which provides much more flexibility when post-precessing and results in much more "film-looking" highlights.

I love the M-Monochrom, and like not having to convert color shots: knowing that I can only have B&W when shooting with this camera makes me more concentrated in visualizing the B&W, which I think leads to better B&W photography. However, no one needs to feel that an M-Monochrom is essential, as there is a lot of good B&W photography from color digital cameras. Here are a few pictures: see the examples below with the GRD and the GXR-Module.



M-Monochrom/Summicron-28 at ISO 8,000 at f/2.0 (no exposure diffcilulty)

Dambulla



M-Monochrom/Summicron-28 at ISO 2,500

Bangkok




M-Monochrom/Summilux-50 preASPH at ISO 1250

Paris




Ricoh GXR Molule/Elmarit-21 ASPH

Chiang Mai




Ricoh GRD2

Bangkok


—Mitch/Bangkok
Looking for Baudelaire [WIP]
 
I keep hoping that Ricoh would release a monochrome sensor GR variant.
I think that little camera has enough of a cult following to pull it off.
 
YYV_146 said:
I actually can't see too much being spent on developing the MM...Leica just removed the bayer and IR filter and put a piece of optical glass there instead, right? The chassis and components almost all come from the M9. Tweaking the software to read single pixel luminance data instead of the standard processing algorithm also probably isn't too difficult.
Click to expand...

I recall reading there were improvements made to the main electronics boards as well.

Amungst mine the, MM certainly seems significantly less prone to high ISO banding than the M9.
 
FrozenInTime said:
I recall reading there were improvements made to the main electronics boards as well.

Amungst mine the, MM certainly seems significantly less prone to high ISO banding than the M9.
Click to expand...

Yes. I felt that the MM was somewhat more responsive - but maybe that's just me.

The better high iso performance can be explained by the removal of the Bayer filter, which cuts out about 1.5 stops of light. Hence ISO 1000 on the MM is actually ISO 320 (or so) on the M9. That and the lack of color noise makes the MM a very competent camera for high ISO work...and why I want a M type 240 version for things such as night street photography.
 
YYV_146 said:
Yes. I felt that the MM was somewhat more responsive - but maybe that's just me.

The better high iso performance can be explained by the removal of the Bayer filter, which cuts out about 1.5 stops of light. Hence ISO 1000 on the MM is actually ISO 320 (or so) on the M9. That and the lack of color noise makes the MM a very competent camera for high ISO work...and why I want a M type 240 version for things such as night street photography.
Click to expand...

The removal of a Bayer filter removes the need for color interpolation algorithms and thus simplifying the entire image chain.
 
The only thing that doesn't work for me with the MM is the price ... that aside I find it the most desirable camera on the market currently.
 
NazgulKing said:
Utterly debatable. Monochrome cameras have been in service in the security and defense camera industry for ages.
Click to expand...

Which bit is debatable?

Development costs? I'm aware that monochrome cameras existed before this one, but I'll go out on a limb and say that I don't think that manufacturers of such equipment would simply provide all their technology for free to Leica.

Perhaps I'm missing your point, but I don't see how something already existing in the industry changes Leica's need to pay salaries etc.
 
thegman said:
Which bit is debatable?

Development costs? I'm aware that monochrome cameras existed before this one, but I'll go out on a limb and say that I don't think that manufacturers of such equipment would simply provide all their technology for free to Leica.

Perhaps I'm missing your point, but I don't see how something already existing in the industry changes Leica's need to pay salaries etc.
Click to expand...

The point is that monochrome cameras are inherently simpler to develop and operate. The color interpolation algorithm is what complicates the bulk of camera processing and a major source of image artifacts such as moire. Developing a sensor that does not need color is a no-brainer. I'm not even sure what Leica's issues were when it came to developing a monochrome camera. Sensor manufacturing costs are even lower with one less layer to overlay on the sensor. The only possible reason why the camera is so expensive is probably because Leica ordered a much smaller batch of sensors and thus driving up the price by a few times.
 
NazgulKing said:
The point is that monochrome cameras are inherently simpler to develop and operate. The color interpolation algorithm is what complicates the bulk of camera processing and a major source of image artifacts such as moire. Developing a sensor that does not need color is a no-brainer. I'm not even sure what Leica's issues were when it came to developing a monochrome camera. Sensor manufacturing costs are even lower with one less layer to overlay on the sensor. The only possible reason why the camera is so expensive is probably because Leica ordered a much smaller batch of sensors and thus driving up the price by a few times.
Click to expand...

Right, I see, well I don't know much about manufacturing, but I do know that the less you make of something, the more expensive it is per part.

And simpler firmware or not, someone has to be paid to do it.

I don't doubt you're right about the small batch, however.
 
Now they just need to standartize on a battery designs so we users can buy one 10, 20, 30...years later. It's a shame when one has to toss good camera just because new fresh batteries can't be bought anymore! Or just make AA-fueled grips.

What's they joy spending 28K for limited edition camera not being sure it can be propely operated 10 years later?
 
btgc said:
Now they just need to standartize on a battery designs so we users can buy one 10, 20, 30...years later. It's a shame when one has to toss good camera just because new fresh batteries can't be bought anymore! Or just make AA-fueled grips.

What's they joy spending 28K for limited edition camera not being sure it can be propely operated 10 years later?
Click to expand...



Living in a glass cabinet probably won't require a battery! :D
 
I don't actually think the MM is misunderstood at all ... it's perfectly clear what Leica's aims were with this camera and it was a pretty bold move IMO.

People who own the thing appear to love it ... the number of image posts in the MM thread considering the exclusivity of the camera is amazing!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom