Monochrom filter discussion

[platypus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

..However – and it is a very big however – B & W photography is essentially a representational rather than a literal medium. It involves a high degree of abstraction and transformation. Every practitioner has their own way of seeing things and presenting them in B & W. There is no right or wrong way.

 

YES!!!!

[michali]

I've been experimenting with red, yellow and orange filters on the MM. I'm not certain there are any easy shortcuts ... and I like that. There is a lot of room to end up with a result that matches your vision (as long as you are careful not to overexpose.) Most often, I find that I more effectively get what I want with no filters and some time in the digital darkroom (post processing.)

 

Working with the MM is not for those who want a simplistic, push the shutter and walk away black and white image. The more thought and effort you put into your images before you push the button and afterward through an excellent working knowledge of programs like Lightroom will impact your results in significant ways.

 

There is a steep learning curve in getting the best images out of the MM ... just like there is with most cameras. It takes time and work to develop a process that maximizes results. Personally, I feel like I'm just scratching the surface.

 

But when you put it all together, the MM can deliver results that are luscious. And I find that to be a worthy pursuit.

 

Thank you Kurt I fully agree with you!

[wattsy]

I largely agree with the consensus here that, whilst not essential, an orange or yellow filter is desirable in most situations and this thread should serve as a word of warning to anyone attracted to a Monochrom because of its "better ISO performance". The addition of filters cuts into that ISO performance – e.g the use of an orange filter brings the much trumpeted ISO 10,000 of the MM down to an effective ISO 2500 – putting it back in similar territory to an M9. That said, the absence of aliasing artifacts I think still gives the MM an edge when it comes to using the camera at the noisier ISO settings.

[menos I M6]

With respect Ian, the warning is a bit overblown - yes, filters cut light but they are not mandatory to use, while I generally don't use colour filters in the dark hours, where I have to push ISO past ISO 1600.

 

The Mono is simply so much better in clean high ISO files than the M9, this alone is a reason to upgrade.

[jaapv]

Filter factors are not an absolute value and the MM reacts differently from film. I just ried an Orage filter on/off comparison on mixed winter sunlight subject. The difference was 1 1/3rd stop. And when I need 10.000 I don't use a filtern

[wattsy]

Ok, maybe I should have written a point to note rather than a "word of warning" but I stand by the point. Filters aren't mandatory by any means but IMO they are desirable and will typically reduce the effective ISO by a half or more.

[wattsy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Filter factors are not an absolute value and the MM reacts differently from film. I just ried an Orage filter on/off comparison on mixed winter sunlight subject. The difference was 1 1/3rd stop. And when I need 10.000 I don't use a filtern

 

Yes, of course, blah blah. I should know by now there is no point trying to have a meaningful discussion with you, Jaap.

[jaapv]

A filter factor is nothing more than an indication. If you photograph a yellow object with a yellow filter it is 1, if you photograph a blue object it is far more than the indicated value.

It has alreadybeen established in this thread that the MM reacts differently from film, so absolute pronouncements arising from indicated numbers are not valid.

 

I did a practical test. Tripod - Orange filter (B&W 40, 4x) on, measure, filter off, measure. Difference 1.1/3rd. stop. Average subject.

 

Filters are certainly not always desirable ( see again a number of posts in this thread) I hardly use them indoors for instance.

Of course it is not wise to photograph in circumstances that need ISO 10.000 with a strong filter on. Nor would you use an ND filter

[wattsy]

I did a practical test. Tripod - Orange filter (B&W 40, 4x) on, measure, filter off, measure. Difference 1.1/3rd. stop. Average subject.

 

I don't want to get dragged into an argument with you, Japp – you are a well known exponent of arguing the toss – but I'm not sure what your point is with regards your practical test? I'm just trying to make a general point that using a filter will come at the cost of some light and that is worth bearing in mind before getting too excited about the so-called high ISO capabilities of the Monochrom. In your own example, the ISO 10,000 becomes an effective speed of ISO 4000 or thereabouts. As I wrote above: "IMO [filters] are desirable and will typically reduce the effective ISO by a half or more".

[Nick_S]

Many low light settings will be a long way from daylight or even tungsten lighting, e.g., sodium vapour street lamps, neon signs, coloured spot lamps etc. So the default advice to use a filter (with its associated light loss) makes less sense in these settings -- it will depend on the particulars of the scene.

 

Nick

[jaapv]

I don't want to get dragged into an argument with you, Japp – you are a well known exponent of arguing the toss – but I'm not sure what your point is with regards your practical test? I'm just trying to make a general point that using a filter will come at the cost of some light and that is worth bearing in mind before getting too excited about the so-called high ISO capabilities of the Monochrom. In your own example, the ISO 10,000 becomes an effective speed of ISO 4000 or thereabouts. As I wrote above: "IMO [filters] are desirable and will typically reduce the effective ISO by a half or more".

Which, in good light, I regard as a positive, as the base ISO is 320, too high. With low light, simply remove filter for full ISO capability. (under Sodium light a yellow or orange filter will not do anything anyway).

 

Btw, conversion of a Bayer image will lose sensitivity as well. For instance if you use only the red channel to simulate a red filter, you lose three quarters of your luminance data.

[Jamie Roberts]

Which, in good light, I regard as a positive, as the base ISO is 320, too high. With low light, simply remove filter for full ISO capability. (under Sodium light a yellow or orange filter will not do anything anyway).

 

Btw, conversion of a Bayer image will lose sensitivity as well. For instance if you use only the red channel to simulate a red filter, you lose three quarters of your luminance data.

 

I can't imagine a remotely normally lit circumstance where I'd use only the red channel in creating a BW from a colour image--especially for people.

[jaapv]

Nor I. It is just an illustration that using color information like a color filter will have a price, just like using a glass filter in front of the lens. ISO loss cannot be an argument to use one or the other. ( albeit with the advantage for a glass filter that one can compensate by admitting more light through opening up the aperture).

[pico]

I was referring to 690 to about 775 nm, which will not be rendered on film. I know Leica has been trying to match panchromatic film by filtering, so it is not impossible ( I have not seen the actual curve) that they created a dip in middle-red.

 

Here is the curve.

[Guest borge]

I don't want to get dragged into an argument with you, Japp – you are a well known exponent of arguing the toss – but I'm not sure what your point is with regards your practical test? I'm just trying to make a general point that using a filter will come at the cost of some light and that is worth bearing in mind before getting too excited about the so-called high ISO capabilities of the Monochrom. In your own example, the ISO 10,000 becomes an effective speed of ISO 4000 or thereabouts. As I wrote above: "IMO [filters] are desirable and will typically reduce the effective ISO by a half or more".

 

But you don't have to use color filters to get great results. So I don't see your point at all? The color filters are an creative option, just like filters on any type of camera.

[jaapv]

But you don't have to use color filters to get great results. So I don't see your point at all? The color filters are an creative option, just like filters on any type of camera.

Except the M8....

[wattsy]

But you don't have to use color filters to get great results. So I don't see your point at all? The color filters are an creative option, just like filters on any type of camera.

 

Which is why I said they are IMO desirable rather than mandatory. Are you suggesting that, in general, you prefer to leave the lens naked? If so, that's fine – each to their own. I personally prefer to use an orange (and, less often, a medium yellow) filter and accept the resulting light loss.

 

Incidentally, Jaap, I don't shoot night time street scenes so sodium vapour lighting isn't relevant to me.

[Jamie Roberts]

But you don't have to use color filters to get great results. So I don't see your point at all? The color filters are an creative option, just like filters on any type of camera.

 

Actually, that's what is being explored here.

 

IMO, since I cannot modify the color response in any way on the MM except by filtering, I would need to filter to get "great results," at least for the kind of people-based photography I would want to do.

 

It would be nice if the MM gave modern BW film-like results with skin without the need for filters, but it doesn't appear to do that based on the images everyone is posting.

 

With an M3, all I have to do is change films (I don't need filters for skin with modern BW films). With an M9, I can manipulate the colour (of a BW) in post.

 

With an MM, I would need to filter at capture just to get the tonal results I would expect.

[sblitz]

...... and if you want to play with the m9 as if you had the mm, use filters and shoot jpeg b&w, the filters work and the results are quite good -- good enough, in fact, so that the photo itself matters more than the technical result.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

Which is why I said they are IMO desirable rather than mandatory. Are you suggesting that, in general, you prefer to leave the lens naked? If so, that's fine – each to their own. I personally prefer to use an orange (and, less often, a medium yellow) filter and accept the resulting light loss.

 

Incidentally, Jaap, I don't shoot night time street scenes so sodium vapour lighting isn't relevant to me.

Sorry. The Sodium remark was the one under yours.