M10 Monochrom in 2-3 months

[a.noctilux]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 hours ago, WvE said:

Then it's a farewell Leica and off to Fuji or Nikon.

I think I'll stuck with my current Leica Ms,

 

and use the rest planned budget to travel or give to associations.

 

 I hope that Leica sells well the new M forward continuing business.

[Printmaker]

I'm perfectly happy with my original Monochrom. And my M10 produces great files for conversion. So a M10 Monochrom is not a necessity. Still, I reserve the right to change my mind if there is a huge jump in IQ.

[Joakim]

Maybe we can hope for a lower base ISO, that would be a welcome improvement 

[jdlaing]

I’m curious why you think you need a lower base iso.

[adan]

20 minutes ago, Joakim said:

Maybe we can hope for a lower base ISO, that would be a welcome improvement 

Difficult if based on the same sensor silicon. Remove the color Bayer filters, and you increase the amount of light reaching the sensor. In fact that is one of the benefits of a Monochrom.

E.G. Leica M9 - base ISO 160; top ISO 2500. Leica Monochrom (1) using same sensor without Bayer filters - base ISO 320; top ISO 10000.

I guess Leica could "build in" an ND filter of 1 or 2 stops (in place of the color Bayer filters) - but that would then also limit the maximum ISO by the same amount.

[Joakim]

2 hours ago, jdlaing said:

I’m curious why you think you need a lower base iso.

Shooting fast lenses in daylight wide open or close to wide open of course. With a base iso of 320 a yellow or even an orange filter might not be enough which mean I either would have to stack filters which I don’t like or I am forced to use a ND filter instead which is ok but not ideal. 

Of course a faster maximum shutter speed would be equally appreciated.

Edited February 26, 2019 by Joakim

[Joakim]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, adan said:

Difficult if based on the same sensor silicon. Remove the color Bayer filters, and you increase the amount of light reaching the sensor. In fact that is one of the benefits of a Monochrom.

E.G. Leica M9 - base ISO 160; top ISO 2500. Leica Monochrom (1) using same sensor without Bayer filters - base ISO 320; top ISO 10000.

I guess Leica could "build in" an ND filter of 1 or 2 stops (in place of the color Bayer filters) - but that would then also limit the maximum ISO by the same amount.

I was comparing to the M Monochrom 246 when writing “lower” and since the M10 has , if I am not mistaken, a lower base iso than the M 240 it should be possible 

[Jeff S]

5 hours ago, Joakim said:

I was comparing to the M Monochrom 246 when writing “lower” and since the M10 has , if I am not mistaken, a lower base iso than the M 240 it should be possible 

Recognizing the difficulty of defining ISO for digital, both the M240 and the M10 have effective base ISOs near 200 (Jono described the M10 at 160; other tested near 200).  There are threads regarding this issue.

As for desiring a lower base ISO, that topic has also been discussed...

Jeff

[Paulus]

Am 1.2.2019 um 08:23 schrieb mikeamosau:

With the release of the M10 Safari Edition today, it seems Leica is following the M240 release schedule. For me that means we should expect an M10 Monochrom very soon...

Leica M 240 - April 2013

Leica M-P 240 - September 2014 (17 months later)

Leica M 240 Safari Edition - February 2015 (5 months later)

Leica M 246 Monochrome - April 2015 (2 months 

——————

Leica M10 - January 2017

Leica M 10 P - August 2018 (18 months later)

Leica M 10 Safari Edition - January 2019 (5 months later)

Leica M 10 Monochrome - I Expect March/April 2019

——————

And just for fun….

Leica M11 - I expect January / February 2021

I’m preordering mine now!!

Mike

Don't you think that it would be really spectaculair if Leica came with a 47mp M11 Monochrom in 2020 December....

[jdlaing]

What if there would be no monochrome at all?

[Paulus]

About the same as no earth...😉

 “There’s no point in acting surprised about it. All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display at your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for 50 of your Earth years, so you’ve had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it’s far too late to start making a fuss about it now. … What do you mean you’ve never been to Alpha Centauri? Oh, for heaven’s sake, mankind, it’s only four light years away, you know. I’m sorry, but if you can’t be bothered to take an interest in local affairs, that’s your own lookout. Energize the demolition beams.” Quote D.A. Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy..

[dkmoore]

On 2/19/2019 at 6:11 AM, WvE said:

Then it's a farewell Leica and off to Fuji or Nikon.

It’s always been this way. Go used equipment if it’s too much. But to bid farewell to a company that is doing exactly what they’ve always done...

you cant bid farewell if you hadn’t joined the party to begin with. 

[dkmoore]

On 2/26/2019 at 11:20 AM, adan said:

Difficult if based on the same sensor silicon. Remove the color Bayer filters, and you increase the amount of light reaching the sensor. In fact that is one of the benefits of a Monochrom.

E.G. Leica M9 - base ISO 160; top ISO 2500. Leica Monochrom (1) using same sensor without Bayer filters - base ISO 320; top ISO 10000.

I guess Leica could "build in" an ND filter of 1 or 2 stops (in place of the color Bayer filters) - but that would then also limit the maximum ISO by the same amount.

Would a built in ND reduce the sensor resolution?

if so, that would take away one of the huge advantages the monochrome has over the color counterparts. 

[adan]

Shouldn't have to.

What reduces the effective resolution with a color camera (except those with Foveon sensors) is mostly the required interpolation or swapping of data between neighboring pixels, to get colors in the picture that are not pure red/green/blue in a checkerboard pattern.

In an example - you photograph someone in a yellow shirt, and the absolute raw output of a Bayer color sensor is a checkerboard - red pixels record some brightness, and green pixels record some brightness, and the blue-filtered pixels get amost no light. To avoid a picture with black specks where all the blue pixels are, you need to "smear" some brightness into those pixels (mathematically) from the red and green pixels, to recreate the yellow - and that averaging math will also smear ~pixel-sized "real" detail.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demosaicing

All sensors have to have a protective cover glass - you wouldn't want to be scrubbing directly on the microscopic silicon architecture when removing dust, for example. With an infrared-removing coating (wouldn't want white trees all the time, either). No reason that that cover glass can't be tinted gray to act as an ND filter as well.

[Chaemono]

vor einer Stunde schrieb adan:

In an example - you photograph someone in a yellow shirt, and the absolute raw output of a Bayer color sensor is a checkerboard - red pixels record some brightness, and green pixels record some brightness, and the blue-filtered pixels get amost no light. To avoid a picture with black specks where all the blue pixels are, you need to "smear" some brightness into those pixels (mathematically) from the red and green pixels, to recreate the yellow - 

Why are the blue-filtered pixels not getting any light and are the red and green pixels smeared with some brightness to make them yellow, or some brightness from the red and green pixels is smeared into the dark blue pixels to make them yellow? And if it’s the latter, what happens to the red and green pixels? How do they get to look yellow? Or does the person all of a sudden appear to wear a checkered shirt, red, green, and dark blue pixels smeared with yellow from the neighboring pixels (but the neighboring pixels are red and green 🤔)? 

[dkmoore]

6 hours ago, adan said:

Shouldn't have to.

What reduces the effective resolution with a color camera (except those with Foveon sensors) is mostly the required interpolation or swapping of data between neighboring pixels, to get colors in the picture that are not pure red/green/blue in a checkerboard pattern.

In an example - you photograph someone in a yellow shirt, and the absolute raw output of a Bayer color sensor is a checkerboard - red pixels record some brightness, and green pixels record some brightness, and the blue-filtered pixels get amost no light. To avoid a picture with black specks where all the blue pixels are, you need to "smear" some brightness into those pixels (mathematically) from the red and green pixels, to recreate the yellow - and that averaging math will also smear ~pixel-sized "real" detail.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demosaicing

All sensors have to have a protective cover glass - you wouldn't want to be scrubbing directly on the microscopic silicon architecture when removing dust, for example. With an infrared-removing coating (wouldn't want white trees all the time, either). No reason that that cover glass can't be tinted gray to act as an ND filter as well.

thanks for the explanation. I thought it had to do with sensor glass thickness and assumed adding an ND filter would add thickness.

[adan]

dkmoore - sure, the sensor glass thickness (or the entire thickness of the "sensor stack" of several filter layers) can also have a blurring effect. I just assume that after 12 years of working really hard to minimize their sensor layer thicknesses (starting with the M8), Leica knows better than to increase them again.

In reality, I doubt Leica will actually add a neutral density layer or tint to any Monochrom anyway. It doesn't really decrease the true ISO of the silicon (no benefit in terms of less noise or better DR), it just blocks that most important component of photography - light. The toy-boys who want to shoot at f/0.95 in bright sunlight will just have to buy their own screw-on ND filters, as they always have. While "the rest of us" will benefit from the higher ISO and ability to capture dim light.

Chaemono - A blue filter blocks red and green light. Therefore, since yellow is a combination of red light and green light, none of the available light from a yellow subject can penetrate the blue filter. Now there are different "types" of yellow, from intense and saturated to pale and nearly white (i.e. reflecting some blue light, even though less than red and green). So it is not "either/or" but "more or less." Note how a blue filter "sees" this color pattern - the yellows go black (or nearly so).

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!

The same of course applies to the red and green-filtered pixels - they cannot "see" in the other two colors, and will render them dark or black. Until de-mosaiced.

And indeed all the pixels of each color borrow brightness data from the surrounding pixels, when de-bayerized/de-mosaiced. To get the "real" color of the subject, ± any color from the lighting itself (white midday sun, orange sunset light, yellow indoor lights, red spotlights, purple spotlights, etc.)

The proof is in the pudding - we normally just get accurate full-color renditions of scenes, without black checkers. The only hint of the process shows when it gets confused by very delicate subject (motif) textures, and produces moiré patterns or color-aliased lines.

Below I copied and "added" the pure-red-filtered square and pure-green-filtered square from the image above, on top of the blue-filtered image - and suddenly all the colors (yellows, oranges, blue-greens, reds, pinks, purples) are restored in all their glory. This why red, green, and blue are called the "additive" primary colors. red + blue = magenta, red + green = yellow, green + blue = cyan/turquoise/blue-green

Edited April 3, 2019 by adan

[RexGig0]

I had thought I would wait for the M10 Monochrom, but then my nearest official Leica enabler, er, I mean Leica dealer, had a nearly-new 246, last summer, and upon handling it, I found it was not clumsy to handle, as I had expected, after having started with an M10. My 246 has enough difference to serve as a constant tactile reminder that I am capturing monochrome images. I doubt I will want to trade or sell the 246. They are a wonderful pair. 

Yes, of course, I could change my mind later, but an M10 Monochrom does not feel like a priority, anymore. Perhaps, if it has the quieter shutter of the M10-P, the temptation will be greater.

[Jeff S]

For me the original MM complements the M10 well.  No desire for a newer Monochrom IQ-wise, but the M10 platform does appeal for its more refined build quality (including quiet shutter release) and improved VF (along with the 2m optimized frame lines, unlike 1m for M9 platform).  Still, I wouldn’t spend the money for a new Monochrom; the MM was bought used for half the cost of my M10, and doesn’t get enough use to justify more.  A used M246 would offer some of these improvements, but I’ll stick with CCD.

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[WvE]

On 4/2/2019 at 5:42 PM, dkmoore said:

It’s always been this way. Go used equipment if it’s too much. But to bid farewell to a company that is doing exactly what they’ve always done...

you cant bid farewell if you hadn’t joined the party to begin with. 

Although I'm sure that Leica is aware of the laws of price elasticity,  just concerned that prices will continue to increase, and Leica increasingly becoming a jewellery object for the rich and famous and ... the blind Leica followers.

BTW: I was reasonably early to the Leica party, the mid-eighties.