Monochrome (CCD) question

[Wayne]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am satisfied with the B&W performance of my M8, up to ISO 320. In your practical experience with M9 Monochrome (CCD,) how high can you take ISO settings on the M9 before noise levels in files give you photographs that would be judged to be inferior to M8 at 320.

 

I apologize, ahead of time, for possibly being a nuisance with this question. I realize there are skads of information on the cameras. I sometimes have difficulty finding information specifically related to information I seek.................or lack the ability to translate what is given in more technical terms.

 

Thanks,

 

Wayne

[jaapv]

The difference between M8 and M9 in noise behaviour is about 1 EV value.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Luke_Miller]

In comparing M8.2 images at ISO 320 with shots from my M9 Monochrom my unscientific visual comparison is that Monochrom shots at ISO 2000 are comparable from a noise perspective.  My M9 Monochrom easily bests my Typ 240 in high ISO performance.

[jaapv]

Yes - the Monochrom is another beast in that respect. The type of noise generated is different too. ISO 10.000 shots are still quite usable.

Sorry, I got thrown by the remark about the M9. That  is a colour camera.

[adan]

M9 = CCD full color camera

M Monochrom (no color, no "9") = CCD monochrome camera

 

Don't confuse them just because they both use a CCD.

[Wayne]

Thank you. I was aware of that. I guess I just did not write clearly.

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

OK - so it happens I just acquired a CCD Monochrom, and have my old M8 files. I find I didn't shoot the M8 much at 320 - either I wanted max quality and stuck with 160, or the light and shutter speed required 640 or higher. But I found enough.

 

Attached is a cropped-to-100%-pixels sample of an M8 shot at 320, converted to B&W, and the closest match for individual pixel noise that I see with the Monochrom, which is ISO 1600. I bracketed from ISO 500 to ISO 6400 - this was the best match overall. One could debate whether 1250 or 2000 might be a slightly better match, depending on the tone chosen (shadow, midtone, or highlight.)

 

That is about what one would expect, given the relationships of top ISOs (2500 vs. 10000). The color filtering on the sensor to achieve color pictures with the M8/M9 "eats" about 2 stops worth of light.

 

However, there are other factors.

 

First - the M8 has 10 Mpixels and the Monochrom has 18, so when the per-pixel noise is identical, it is rather like comparing 35mm Tri-X to 120 Tri-X. A Monochrome picture will have the same visible noise in an 11 x 17 print as the M8 will in a 9 x 13 print, at 1600 vs. 320.

 

Second, the M8 image - even converted to B&W, is photographed through a checkerboard of color filters, and therefore has to be "de-bayerized" - which is to say the processing of an M8 (or M9 or M240) DNG to a picture requires intentional "cross-talk" of data between neighboring red, green and blue pixels to get a smooth tone. Therefore the noise gets slightly blurred into neighboring pixels as well, and is slightly clumpy.

 

The Monochrom, of course, does not receive de-bayerizing. Each pixel stands alone without cross-talk (unless the image is resampled). Therefore the Monochrom noise is more "sandy" and sharper - exactly 1 pixel per noise speck.

 

Not very noticeable at lower ISOs - but once you get above 1000 with the color CCD cameras, you start to get a lot of blobby noise, and "moth-eaten edges" as the cross-talk runs across sharp edges. Especially under yellow indoor light, where the blue-filtered pixels get virtually no light at all - that's 1/4 of your data that is just "black."

 

The Monochrom is "noisy" at ISO 10000 - but it is a "clean, sandy" noise (like Delta 3200 in Rodinal), without blobs or chewed edges. Sharper and with a better tonal range than an M9 at 2500.

See next post.....

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!

[adan]

CCD M Monochrom at ISO 10000 - definitely noisy, but a very sharp, clear mezzotint noise, that retains a lot of pixel-scale fine detail. Main image 100% pixels, with inset of overall frame.

 

Just a whole different dynamic from converting bayer-pattern color images to B&W. (135 Tele-Elmar @ f/5.6)

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!

[Wayne]

Adan,

 

Wow! Thank you so much for the information and samples. I have a drawer full of Ilford 3200 and a new bottle of Rodinal, as that combination has, so far, been my favorite.....in my novice efforts to develop my own film. I have also had some fun with Foma 400, shot at 1600, and developed with Rodinal.

 

On top of everything else, it occurred to me last night......no more IR filter problems with the MM.

[Wayne]

Thanks once again for all the help- special kudos to Adan. I have taken the plunge and purchased a Monochrom VI. I went with a used camera from LensAuthority, which is a sister company to LensRentals.com. I am not affiliated with the company in any way, but have had very good service in past. Camera came with 90 day warranty and I was able to verify it has received a replacement sensor already.

 

I am not sure how many are aware of this source for used cameras at reasonable prices. I know they had four Monochrom cameras available at the time I purchased mine.

[Guest JMF]

Congrats on the purchase Wayne, you'll love your MM v1.

 

Watch out for banding from 5000 ISO and over when trying to lift up some occasional underexposed shots (exposed for the highlights) !

 

Here a shot taken at 5000 ISO with a 50 Lux asph :

 

At the Palmer & Co by JM__, on Flickr

 

Best , JM.

[Printmaker]

Sadly my Monochrom is headed back to the factory for sensor issues this afternoon but just last week I was making a few B&W prints from old M8 files and from later MM files. I was surprised just how good those old M8 files printed. They had a certain presence. Possibly because I never used the IR cut filter when using this camera for B&W. "The M8 glow." Still, the MM is a far better camera. MM grain at 3200 is certainly not objectionable or, at least, has an artistic appeal where I found the M8 unusable at 1250.

Congrats on your MM. You will love it.

[IWC Doppel]

I find 1600 slightly grainy, 1000 barely noticeable in use. My old M8 rarely went over 500, I'd say you are 2-3 stops better of with the MM1, I have zero low light issues and happily use f2.8 in low light, I struggle with 2.8 with my M9 in very low light. With my M8 I needed 1.4-2 to survive

[Wayne]

Thanks for the comments. The M8 is a great camera. I intend to hang on to it for as long as it works and can be serviced.

[Wayne]

Well I recieved my new/used monochrom today. I was able to obtain- with documentation from Leica- a unit that has recieved the new sensor. I am pretty happy with what I have received.

 

I suppose it is the fact that I am a novice, but I am, once again, overwhelmed with the capacity of a Leica digital camera to expose/meter with such perfection. Once again, it amazes me that, with Leica, the metering function is something that I do not even have to consider, when using.

 

Can somebody direct me to a source of comprehensive information on just how the metering system in this camera works. It came with packaging, but no owners manual.

[adan]

Here's one version of the CCD Monochrom manual - the whole thing, so you'll have to scroll past the "German" pages: http://static.bhphotovideo.com/lit_files/42009.pdf

 

The metering (for the CCD version, no live view) is about as simple as you can get. In the bottom of the camera chamber, behind the lens, and in front of the shutter, is a little dungeon or pit for the metering cell. Which stares backwards at the shutter blades. The central shutter blades are gray instead of black, and thus show the image projected on them. The meter cell reads that image for brightness. between the narrow strip of gray shutter, and the focused metering area of the cell, you get a strongly centerweighted metering area.

 

The projected image on the shutter, of course, gets brighter or darker depending on the aperture you set - it is "stopped down" metering, since the M lenes are always stopped down to what the aperture ring reads (unlike modern SLRs).

 

In "A" mode, the camera's metering "brain" picks a shutter speed that is correct for the amount of light it sees projected on the shutter blades, and the ISO you have chosen. In manual mode (you are choosing the shutter speed) - the meter readout in the viewfinder (bottom) shows left and right arrows if it thinks you are over or underexposing, and a central large red dot if its electrons agree with your shutter choice. The arrows indicate which direction to turn either the aperture ring or shutter dial, to get to correct exposure. You will NOT see the shutter speed in the viewfinder in manual mode - the arrows and dot use up that space. You will never see an aperture readout in the viewfinder.  If you need to know - look at the lens or shutter speed dial.

 

Beyond that, there are other functions or indications regarding exposure compensation, speed too slow for hand-holding, auto-ISO function, etc. See the manual.

 

Important side note for the Leica M metering. The off-the-shutter meter always reads the same portion of the final picture. A circle or oval about 1/2 the height of a horizontal picture.

 

BUT - because the viewfinder "view" is a fixed size, the metering area in the viewfinder varies with focal length. You have to remember to judge metering area based on the FRAMELINES for the lens you are using, not for the whole finder.

 

See: http://static1.squarespace.com/static/50d0bee7e4b07abde4169be1/t/53f20f22e4b0fe85d163299c/1408372515205/leica+meter

[jaapv]

You can find the metering pattern in our FAQ,  here:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/216580-leica-m8-m82-m9-m9p-mm-mtyp240-faqs-questions-with-answers/?p=2464134

[Ernstk]

I've been having similar questions around usable ISO and I'm finding the Monochrom dangerously attractive.

 

What would you say the usable difference between my M-P(240) and the MM would be? 2 stops, or perhaps less?

 

Also, is there a difference between the MM1 and 2 in this respect?

 

Ernst

Edited July 17, 2016 by Ernstk

[Wayne]

I did acquire, and briefly use, an MM1 for a few days. Presently, the camera has been shipped back to the seller to inspect the rangefinder adjustment as I was having difficulty obtaining clean focus.....a problem I have not had with my M8. In the interim, I have an opportunity to try out an M9.

 

Here is what I think....strictly from casual observance of photos.....focus problems aside:

 

1. When one discounts the various MM1 writings about "seeing in B&W"- a concept I am not sure I understand as well as I should- as justification for choosing MM1, the main reason, in my opinion, for choosing the MM1 is the liberty of shooting at high ISO. As far as I am concerned, everything is usable up to, and including, ISO 10,000. With a Summilux, the only limit on light is that limit which prevents you from obtaining clear focus.

 

2. On M9,Color photography is available and outstanding, but high ISO performance is not as good as MM1....not nearly so.

 

I cannot analyze files, but I can look at them. Both cameras produce great photographs.

 

In my opinion, it is pretty simple: do you want color or do you want no limits as far as low light photography goes.

 

Oh, and the plain exterior of the MM1 is a very attractive feature.

 

I am hoping they do find that the MM1 rangefinder needs an adjustment. I hate to think the MM1 will be off limits for me because of some innate problem with my eyes.

Edited July 18, 2016 by Wayne

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[IWC Doppel]

Leica did produce some graphs of noise for the MM1 and M9 I'll see if I can find them

 

From memory the MM was jus over a stop better, but using both the MM I personally find it nearer 2 stops, whilst that doesn't sound like much it really feels like it plus noise is much more acceptable with the MM and the files are more flexible to post processing

 

I think my 9 was a good stop better than the 8, the MM feels nearer 3 on from the M8