edw Posted February 16, 2017 Share #21 Posted February 16, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm not convinced that would settle anything. We would need to compare DNG files shot under the same lighting conditions and of the same subject. Then, of course, the pp would have to be done using the same software and in an identical manner. Maybe we need to get several people together for a few days of shooting and comparing (and throw in some good scotch while we're at it). I'd like to make a subtle point: I think the question is not which is better shooting with identical parameters (namely ISO and shutter speed), but instead, what, given the same scene, are the relative strengths and weakness of each tool given an expert user of each tool. You suggestion is a laudable one—especially regarding the scotch. I just want to chime in that the practitioners should have the freedom to choose ISO/shutter speed combinations at their discretion, as the goal is to compare the end photograph, not the capabilities at a given ISO. The same should go for post processing. The outcome would be an understanding of how to use each tool to achieve the best possible B&W results. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 16, 2017 Posted February 16, 2017 Hi edw, Take a look here Is M Monochrome really worth if still own M240. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
fotografr Posted February 17, 2017 Share #22 Posted February 17, 2017 The problem with that approach is that it becomes a contest to see who is more skilled at determining the shooting parameters and post processing. What we are looking for is whether better results can be obtained by converting color to b&w versus using a Monochrom camera, all else being equal. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edw Posted February 17, 2017 Share #23 Posted February 17, 2017 The problem with that approach is that it becomes a contest to see who is more skilled at determining the shooting parameters and post processing. What we are looking for is whether better results can be obtained by converting color to b&w versus using a Monochrom camera, all else being equal. I understand your concern, but I don't understand the value of conducting a naive comparison. Understanding what a skillful, experienced user of one and the other can accomplish is more interesting than knowing what a naïf would produce if handed two cameras and asked to shoot a picture in e.g. aperture priority and auto ISO. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted February 17, 2017 Share #24 Posted February 17, 2017 (edited) Maybe we need to get several people together for a few days of shooting and comparing (and throw in some good scotch while we're at it).Well if that is needed I doubt whether the differences are lifethreatening then. I did a comparison myself last week between M10 en MM1 and although I was as convinced as you of the unbeatableness of the Monochrome in tonal differentations etc., I had to admit to myself that I cannot find really important differences between results of converted M10-files and the MM1 results. Although they won't convince you, the results are here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/269168-leica-m10-vs-monochrom/page-3 Edited February 17, 2017 by otto.f 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Pope Posted February 17, 2017 Share #25 Posted February 17, 2017 If you can afford it and love monochrome photography, then I would say 'yes'. I have had my M246 for just about a month now and I think its a phenomenally good camera. I used to have my own darkroom, which I closed down and sold off to fund an M9-P. Now it feels like I have a darkroom in my camera bag. I had thought about buying another film M and developing my own negatives again, but now I have the M246, I don't think so. The M240 is a very capable camera and can produce excellent images for conversion to monochrome. However, the 246 has the edge in my view. The question that has cropped up in my mind now is "Should I sell my M240 and use my DL-109 when I want to do colour pictures?" 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
i-Leica Posted February 17, 2017 Share #26 Posted February 17, 2017 What is also important, is that in Silver-Efex Pro you NEED color information to make the conversion. When you have color dng, you can apply any filter to change the picture - impossible with the monochrom file, where you HAVE to apply filter before you make a picture. When you have M10, you can change jpg to monochrom, and you will SEE your picture in Visoflex in black&white having all information sin your dng. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
duoenboge Posted February 17, 2017 Share #27 Posted February 17, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have both. The M and the M Monochrom. The Monochrom give me a impression to make photos like in the old good times with B&W films. You will never get this feeling with a M-D or something else. When you go out for make photos you have to concentrate on B&W without have the possibility to switch (rescue yourself) to color. It’s a very special but very nice felling. I enjoy it a lot. I´m sure it is possible to make very good B&W photos also with the M. But the M don’t give me this special taste. Maybe it’s not enough points for going to spend 5-7k€ for the Monochrom. But if the money are not the problem, I think you will enjoy it. It is IMO not really a alternative to a color camera. It´s a very interesting (but quite luxury) supplement. Good choice! 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmx_2 Posted February 17, 2017 Share #28 Posted February 17, 2017 Given the ISO-capabilities of the M10, I think the Monochrom makes less sense today. I own both the M240 and M246, and the 246-files are superior in terms of IQ and high ISO capability. If I had an M10 and a M246, I’m not so sure the difference at high ISO would be so big any more. With my M246 I can easily shoot clean files at 8000ISO. As others have stated already, if you are skilled, and have the time, in Photoshop/Another Good Photo Editing Program, you have a lot more options with a color DNG and you can get a very similar result IQ wise. What I do like with the M246 is how little I actually need to adjust in post. I shoot a lot indoor at high ISO and I usually only have to add some clarity, a little bit of black, maybe some contrast, crop If necessary and then I’m done. Whereas with my M240 you need to tweak a lot more to get a good result, especially indoor with mixed lighting. My other usage for the M246 is when the weather is bad, and where I live (in the south of Sweden, close to the sea) we have a lot of bad weather, basically from end of October until beginning of April/May the weather is usually all grey, humid and a bit wet mixed with some occasional snow. Under those conditions (indoor and grey weather) B/W-photo in general shines to me, and there, the M246 really shines! During the summer here (where it gets dark at 23:00 and sun gets up at 2.30), I mostly shot with my M240 instead. Others may of course have different experiences/opinions This one is 3200ISO indoor in mixed lighting (nothing special, just an example ): 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted February 17, 2017 Share #29 Posted February 17, 2017 What I do like with the M246 is how little I actually need to adjust in post. I shoot a lot indoor at high ISO and I usually only have to add some clarity, a little bit of black, maybe some contrast, crop If necessary and then I’m done. Whereas with my M240 you need to tweak a lot more to get a good result, especially indoor with mixed lighting. That's true and also counts for the MM1 vs. the M10, I'm ready in a minute with the MM1. So if I want pure B&W I leave my M10 at home. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmx_2 Posted February 17, 2017 Share #30 Posted February 17, 2017 When I bought the M246, my main reason was to have a common plattform, sharing grip, EVF, R-adapter and most important, battery and charger. I would have saved some money going for the MM1, but the plattform commonality weight rather heavy in my case. If you only want a "monochrome"-camera, the MM1 will no doubt offer "more bang for the buck" . 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
i-Leica Posted February 17, 2017 Share #31 Posted February 17, 2017 When I bought the M246, my main reason was to have a common plattform, sharing grip, EVF, R-adapter and most important, battery and charger. I would have saved some money going for the MM1, but the plattform commonality weight rather heavy in my case. If you only want a "monochrome"-camera, the MM1 will no doubt offer "more bang for the buck" . Just get the M10 and if it's still not perfect, get MM10 later too. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted February 17, 2017 Share #32 Posted February 17, 2017 (edited) I understand your concern, but I don't understand the value of conducting a naive comparison. Understanding what a skillful, experienced user of one and the other can accomplish is more interesting than knowing what a naïf would produce if handed two cameras and asked to shoot a picture in e.g. aperture priority and auto ISO. I would never hand my Monochrom to a naïf. Edited February 17, 2017 by fotografr 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted February 17, 2017 Share #33 Posted February 17, 2017 Given the ISO-capabilities of the M10, I think the Monochrom makes less sense today. I own both the M240 and M246, and the 246-files are superior in terms of IQ and high ISO capability. If I had an M10 and a M246, I’m not so sure the difference at high ISO would be so big any more. With my M246 I can easily shoot clean files at 8000ISO. This one is 3200ISO indoor in mixed lighting (nothing special, just an example ): You're quite right about the 246 being capable of producing clean files like this. It's all personal preference, but I don't mind a bit of grit (call it noise or grain) in an image to give it substance, depth and character. I suppose that's part of coming out of the film era. I've long considered the high ISO race a bit over the top. I've shot ISO 5000 with my MM (like this image) but can count on one hand the number of times I've felt the need for more. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 9 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/269427-is-m-monochrome-really-worth-if-still-own-m240/?do=findComment&comment=3215308'>More sharing options...
otto.f Posted February 17, 2017 Share #34 Posted February 17, 2017 Super clean dream machine is not what you always want. I really love the noise of the M10 at ISO's above 1600 converted to B&W. The Monochrome is just different but neither has less fantastic Leica work and thinking behind it. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted February 17, 2017 Share #35 Posted February 17, 2017 I'm not convinced that would settle anything. We would need to compare DNG files shot under the same lighting conditions and of the same subject. Then, of course, the pp would have to be done using the same software and in an identical manner. Maybe we need to get several people together for a few days of shooting and comparing (and throw in some good scotch while we're at it). I think you are simply raising barriers to discourage. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted February 17, 2017 Share #36 Posted February 17, 2017 (edited) I think you are simply raising barriers to discourage. Yes, that's me. My goal in life is to discourage everything. Now we have that out in the open. That's why I've been mentoring young photographers for the last 20 years--to discourage them. Edited February 17, 2017 by fotografr 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
snooper Posted February 19, 2017 Share #37 Posted February 19, 2017 I would think it's simpler and more complicated at the same time. Just check your LR libraries: if the real keepers are in B&W then Monochrom obviously makes perfect sense for you. Has nothing to do with the files or the ISO... Should you have significant percentage of satisfying pictures that are not B&W, then you might need something else. And if the ratio is 50/50, then your life is very simple: you need both cameras 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted February 20, 2017 Share #38 Posted February 20, 2017 I would think it's simpler and more complicated at the same time. Just check your LR libraries: if the real keepers are in B&W then Monochrom obviously makes perfect sense for you. Has nothing to do with the files or the ISO... Should you have significant percentage of satisfying pictures that are not B&W, then you might need something else. And if the ratio is 50/50, then your life is very simple: you need both cameras That is what they call the pragmatic view. And what if that one and only great picture after years and years of enjoying the play with your Monochrome makes you world famous (or rich or powerful or eternally happy, just what your ambition is) in one stroke? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyril Jayant Posted February 20, 2017 Share #39 Posted February 20, 2017 I switched and was shocked by how much the absence of color decreased my interest in photography. I had no idea until I gave it up that it was so important to me. It was a valuable but expensive learning experience. When I first got my M6 ( 1998 ) my photography interests was highly influenced by the B&W photography. So about 18 years I shot only B&W films in it and less than 10 colour rolls I exposed in it. B&W never shocked me but M6 and the Leica lenses impressed me to do mostly Monochrome in my visuals . 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DwF Posted February 21, 2017 Share #40 Posted February 21, 2017 Super clean dream machine is not what you always want. I really love the noise of the M10 at ISO's above 1600 converted to B&W. The Monochrome is just different but neither has less fantastic Leica work and thinking behind it. It is the reason that the 63 Fender Princeton (as one shining example) still has a voice and place in music studios. Sometimes you want a signal to break up in just the right way. The MM1 seems to have this quality, in a camera. 6 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.