Deliberate1 Posted July 19, 2015 Share #1 Posted July 19, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Friends, I have been inching towards the purchase of a Monochrom - either a used M9M or 246, and got just one step closer this morning. I spent last week on Monhegan Island, a small spit of land 12 miles off the Maine coast made famous as a artist colony going back more than a hundred years. The likes of Rockwell Kent, George Bellows and two generations of Wyeths have spent more than a little time taking in and giving back to the island. And for good reason. It is a gem. Lush forests of conifers and deciduous trees give way to ragged cliffs towering 160 feet over the incessant Atlantic. And a hardy group of locals still farm the ocean for lobster. I took my four year old M9 and my quiver of lenses - Summilux 50mm, Elmarit 90mm and a Zeiss 35mm - and shot around 1200 images. This morning I began to peruse them. Perhaps it is because my brain has been monochromed over the last month or so as I contemplate the merits such a purchase. But as I went through the first 8GB chip, and previewed the images for culling in Adobe RAW, I seemed to gravitate unexpectedly to B&W conversions. Pretty easy to do with a simple slide of the Saturation function. It was fascinating to see rather uninteresting images in color take on an entirely new personality in monochrom. Shapes, tonality, playful contrasts of light and dark took center stage once the patina of color was stripped away. Given my present mindset, I could not help but wonder how these desaturated images would have looked if shot with a box with no color filters. At the risk of being disappointed by your responses, which may prompt a reassessment of the true quality (or potential) of these M9 conversions which I think are quite wonderful, please tell me what you saw when you went from this workflow to a dedicated B&W sensor, whether the v1 or v2. Obliged in advance, David Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 19, 2015 Posted July 19, 2015 Hi Deliberate1, Take a look here What am I missing by converting M9 files to B&W vs Monochrom. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
a.noctilux Posted July 19, 2015 Share #2 Posted July 19, 2015 David As M9 user for years and now Monochrom user (+ M9), I can answer only my perception. One can not replace the other, so I use them as situations require. Before having the MM, I tried with DNG + jpeg mono (M9) just to have an idea what the b&w photos would look like. Those jpeg in mono could become a guide line for b&w convertion later. Results can be great after PP. But if you "see" your picture as b&w an Monochrom is way to go, PP is far less difficult (for me). Arnaud 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deliberate1 Posted July 19, 2015 Author Share #3 Posted July 19, 2015 (edited) David As M9 user for years and now Monochrom user (+ M9), I can answer only my perception. One can not replace the other, so I use them as situations require. Arnaud, I appreciate your kind reply. As an M9 user, I would be interested to know what potential remains on the table from a practical perspective by shooting the dedicated monochrom vs. the conversion from the M9. Otherwise put, based on your experience, if you took the very same image with both cameras at similar settings, and converted the M9 version to monochrom optimally, how would they differ in a print. I realize that the M9M has a greater ISO range, but that is not what I am getting at. Rather, comparing the relative potential for the cameras on the best level playing field. Regards, David Edited July 19, 2015 by Deliberate1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 19, 2015 Share #4 Posted July 19, 2015 The Monochrom will put every pixel you capture 1:1 in the print, whereas the M9 will run through the Bayer Filter and colour interpolation, causing you to lose a considerable part of the resolution, and , what is worse, edge contrast. However, with a converted colour file you can endlessly vary the tonality, in the Monochrom you will need colour filters on the lens and still have less control. Up to you... Oh - and don't desaturate files. Do proper conversions (there are quite a few methods) 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manolo Laguillo Posted July 19, 2015 Share #5 Posted July 19, 2015 There are differences, even in prints as small as 13x18 cms. Try it by yourself... 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deliberate1 Posted July 20, 2015 Author Share #6 Posted July 20, 2015 Oh - and don't desaturate files. Do proper conversions (there are quite a few methods) I use the saturation slide only as a quick review of an entire chip to see which might have monochrom potential. If I find one that works I do the full conversion in CS5 as a layer function. Works rather well for me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted July 20, 2015 Share #7 Posted July 20, 2015 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) The issue is less the camera IMO and more your vision for a b/w print result. I conclude this based on your taking color pics and seeing how they look desaturated….for one, they can look a million different ways depending on interpretation, and two, that's far different from having a b/w vision to start. We all began where you seem to be, but I encourage you to look at a lot more b/w work…..shows, galleries, books, museums, workshops, etc….in addition to your own experimentation…to develop your own vision, style and then work flow. The camera is just a tool to get there, and resolution, dynamic range etc merely become aspects that may or may not prove important to you. One thing is for sure, and Jaap pointed it out: a digital camera with a bayer array will offer far more flexibility in tonal adjustments through use of color channels, even different ones simultaneously, and to local areas. This cannot be achieved to the same degree with a Monochrom (or film), even with color filters. That may or may not prove significant in your ultimate work flow. Ultimately you won't know based on others' opinions which will work best for you….that's up to you to determine. Jeff Edited July 20, 2015 by Jeff S 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted July 20, 2015 Share #8 Posted July 20, 2015 I previously shot with a Leica M8, and was hesitant at first to purchase the Monochrom because of the flexibility the B&W filters on PSCS4 ( the version I am still using) gave me. However, once I discovered the improved resolution of the Monochrom I, and dynamic range, I was hooked. Shooting at higher ISO's in low light has been a treat! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted July 20, 2015 Share #9 Posted July 20, 2015 David, some good replies, but I appreciate 'better tonal rendition' or 'higher resolution' may be difficult to quantify without comparison. So I'd say the 18mp resolution of the MM looks like it is from a 36mp camera compared with a converted colour image from an M9. Tonally it is also a big jump, while the M9 gets you into smaller Medium Format film quality from a converted image the MM gets you into Large Format film territory. I've done many B&W conversions from the M9 and I'm satisfied with them all, just because they are done with an M9 doesn't make them lesser images to my eye, you work with what you've got. And the same goes for the M240, a fine camera and capable of great B&W conversions. But if your brain thinks in terms of B&W anyway (I rarely used the M9 or M240 for colour), then an MM or M246 makes perfect sense. I carry a P&S around as my backup camera if I need colour, and that hardly ever gets used. Steve 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deliberate1 Posted July 20, 2015 Author Share #10 Posted July 20, 2015 David, some good replies, but I appreciate 'better tonal rendition' or 'higher resolution' may be difficult to quantify without comparison. So I'd say the 18mp resolution of the MM looks like it is from a 36mp camera compared with a converted colour image from an M9. Tonally it is also a big jump, while the M9 gets you into smaller Medium Format film quality from a converted image the MM gets you into Large Format film territory. Steve Steve, that is precisely the kind of comparison I was looking for. And I would agree with your characterization. I still shoot a Rollei 6008i with the legendary 90mm Schneider. That is my litmus test (in color terms) for the M9. When I get it all just right, the Leica at ISO160 with Summilux 50mm on a tripod gives the Rollei a run for its money. Now, if Leica only made a full frame 6x6 cm square sensor.... Best to you. David Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted July 20, 2015 Share #11 Posted July 20, 2015 (edited) I've shot everything from small format to 8x10, and for me, this characterization of the M9 vs the MM is an oversimplification. A lot depends on print size, image characteristics, PP techniques, display conditions, etc, etc…and I've seen M240 print results very comparable to those from the MM at moderate print sizes. Bigger negs, or bigger sensors, offer something that isn't the same as removing a bayer array, IMO….there's no substitute for more real estate. And that bayer array removal, as I wrote above, comes at a cost in PP flexibility….it's not always about trying to get the same results from both cameras; it can be about getting very different results based on what each has to offer. For me, the primary advantage for the MM vs the M9 (or even the M240) is under low light conditions. YMMV….only way to know is to try. Jeff Edited July 20, 2015 by Jeff S 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted July 20, 2015 Share #12 Posted July 20, 2015 Now, if Leica only made a full frame 6x6 cm square sensor.... Well, 45x30mm isn't too shabby for the Leica S. Compare that to your Rollei and your M9 and report back. Of course color and b/w are two different beasts…. Jeff 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted July 20, 2015 Share #13 Posted July 20, 2015 OP You might want to read Overgaard's M9 "book" where he suggested his method of shooting color in DNG and B&W in jpeg with the LCD set to B&W to help you better visulize how your images will look in B&W immediately after capture. Excellent exercise. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deliberate1 Posted July 21, 2015 Author Share #14 Posted July 21, 2015 (edited) Well, 45x30mm isn't too shabby for the Leica S. Compare that to your Rollei and your M9 and report back. Of course color and b/w are two different beasts…. Jeff Thanks for the suggestion but the price of admission for an S system would buy me and my children and my children's children lifetimes of film and processing. And with my Scitex Eversmart Pro II scanner, I can make files that will gag my power Dell with 18GB of RAM. And that 24" Epson printer spits out prints from those files that have entranced me in the many years that I have been using it. Still, I confess, an S...... D Edited July 21, 2015 by Deliberate1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted July 21, 2015 Share #15 Posted July 21, 2015 Thanks for the suggestion but the price of admission for an S system would buy me and my children and my children's children lifetimes of film and processing. Not lately…you can now buy a new S-E plus a 70mm S lens (56 equivalent) for LESS money than a M246 plus a 50 Summilux…$10,295 vs $10,965…. http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/07/new-leica-s-typ-006-s-e-typ-006-and-70mm-cs-lens-promotional-bundle-announced/ Jeff Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deliberate1 Posted July 21, 2015 Author Share #16 Posted July 21, 2015 Not lately…you can now buy a new S-E plus a 70mm S lens (56 equivalent) for LESS money than a M246 plus a 50 Summilux…$10,295 vs $10,965…. http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/07/new-leica-s-typ-006-s-e-typ-006-and-70mm-cs-lens-promotional-bundle-announced/ Jeff, Jeff, Kismet for sure. In my evening stroll through virtual Leica-land, I was perusing the latest S trades on Ebay and then came across a link on Luminous Landscape to the Reddot announcement, the very one that you post above. Like one minute ago. After reading the enticing details and before heading to the S forum to feed my pregnant curiosity I came back to this thread and saw your post above. I confess that the idea of a S is an itch that I would love to scratch. Probably no better time as well. Used S (006) bodies are selling on Ebay for as much or more than the new offerings from Leica. I supposed I would not be so sanguine if I were a current S owner looking to sell given the market pressure that such a price drop causes. Have you any experience with the S? I tell you that I would be all over it if Leica fashioned a Rollei MF to S adapter. Sell all my M gear for an S? Deep breaths... D Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted July 21, 2015 Share #17 Posted July 21, 2015 (edited) I've played with it, and know a fair amount about it, but haven't taken the plunge. For landscape work, which is how I'd mostly use it, LV in the new Typ 007 (first model with CMOS) would be advantageous, but no interest for me at current retail rates. Recent 006 discounts suggest…for better or worse….that the new model will also be heavily discounted at some point. You may want to peruse the S sub-forum for various discussions about the system, including lots of new posts from Neil D, who just sold his M gear for the S 006 system. There are older posts from folks like you weighing (no pun intended) the options. A few even use the S as a walk-about camera. Different strokes... David Farkas, who posts here with some regularity, writes for for the red dot forum, and runs the Leica Miami Store, which has the linked discounts (even better than B&H). He's a good guy and very knowledgeable….you should check out his posts on the S, including as I recall an extensive review on the S2. And here is a recent post of his, responding to those questioning Leica's stance in the pixel wars…. http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2014/11/why-leica-is-staying-at-37-5mp-for-the-s-typ-007/ Good luck... Jeff Edited July 21, 2015 by Jeff S 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted July 21, 2015 Share #18 Posted July 21, 2015 If you like a rather contrasty black and white look, the M9 will do fine. The files from the Monochrom are sometimes described as flat straight out of the camera. I would describe this as a beautiful mid-tone tonality that cannot be replicated with the M9. If you end up taking these subtle files and cranking up the contrast to the extremes in SilverFX, the Monochrome will be a waste. Try it out. I personally prefer the files over any color conversions from the M9. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted July 21, 2015 Share #19 Posted July 21, 2015 The qualitative benefits for a black and white shooter of the MM/M246 over the M9/M240 are easy... greater resolution, better tonality, much better noise control, and what noise there is has a film-like character. The detriments are easy too... there ain't no color. And the palette of PP options is more limited. For someone who likes to experiment with different B&W looks in post, or likes the richness of options after-the-fact, the M9/M240 is probably a better answer. The Monochrom is best-suited for those who, through practice or acculturation - perhaps because they are a longtime black-and-white film shooter - already have a clear sense for the B&W look they wish to achieve. Either platform can produce sterling images. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted July 21, 2015 Share #20 Posted July 21, 2015 (edited) ….best-suited for those who, through practice or acculturation - perhaps because they are a longtime black-and-white film shooter - already have a clear sense for the B&W look they wish to achieve. Exactly why I'm sticking with the M240….except I'd add an 's' to the word 'look'. Jeff Edited July 21, 2015 by Jeff S 1 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.