difference between Q2 set to Monocrhom HC and M10 Monochrom real world resultsm

[38wadcutter]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

With out pixel peeping and looking at files under a microscope, what would the same picture look like taken  by the 2 cameras to 99% of folks looking at it? Your well thought out opinions are eagerly solicited.

[leicameech]

1 hour ago, 38wadcutter said:

With out pixel peeping and looking at files under a microscope, what would the same picture look like taken  by the 2 cameras to 99% of folks looking at it? Your well thought out opinions are eagerly solicited.

Aside from the obvious...that the lens choice on the M10M matters....I don't think anyone would be able to tell the difference. I love shooting my Q2 in monochrom mode, but I only shoot in raw so it's more for the experience and then editing the image accordingly once uploaded to Lightroom. Look stunning either way. The M10M allows you to shoot at effectively unlimited ISO, and to underexpose a bunch when shutter speed is important as shadow detail is very easy to recover. When you are pixel peeping, or working extensively with files that come out of it, the benefits of having the M10M become abundantly clear. At high ISO, the M10M destroys the Q2. It continues to look great after the Q2 starts banding and being very noisy (above 10k). Shadow detail recovery is also a landslide victory for the M10M. If you like shooting with a rangefinder, love black and white, and want the ultimate tool to do it with, the M10M (or the 246 or a non-sensor-corroded M9 Monochrom) offers practical advantages over a color camera and converting to black and white.

When editing Monochrom files though, you're stuck with a black and white file. You can't change luminance of color values to darken leaves or lighten skin tones as you could with a color image converted to black and white. The software still knows you're working with a color image on the Q2, so even after b&w conversion, you're free to replicate the look of having shot with a color filter by changing the luminance of the things you know are a particular color in that image. Can't do that on the M10M. If you didn't shoot with a red filter when you made the picture, you're going to have to get creative making selections etc. to try and get that look (in other words, it'll save you some time to just use a filter). 

short of the long of it, in my humble opinion, is:

• Someone who's not going to nerd out about it as much (if at all) as us Leica nerds do will not be able to tell the difference when looking at a print, 
• The M10M is going to give better gradation, better high ISO, better maneuverability in post-processing, but to the folks you're referring to...who cares! These are not things that are easily observable. 

 

[Miltz]

The simple answer is the images definitely look different. Now which one is better is a matter of taste. That being said the M10 Monochrome has most latitude in editing as the sensor is better. 

[Jared]

On 9/2/2020 at 6:28 PM, 38wadcutter said:

With out pixel peeping and looking at files under a microscope, what would the same picture look like taken  by the 2 cameras to 99% of folks looking at it? Your well thought out opinions are eagerly solicited.

If you simply desaturate a color DNG from a Q2, the images would look similar, but not identical. The M10M would do quite a bit better at high ISO—much more dynamic range as you move above ISO 1600. Overall, though, I prefer the flexibility of shooting a color camera and converting to black and white. Specifically, the ability to choose a B&W profile that suits the image then modify it further using white balance lets you really taylor the look to your taste for each image.without needing to touch more than a couple controls.

I’ll give you two examples from the past few days, both well known sites from around New York City. Here is the first one—the Statue of Liberty. This is how it looked with a straight monochrome conversion (likely similar to what an M10M would have produced). 

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!

And here it is with a different profile and white balance, effectively simulating a color filter on a B&W camera. No other differences—just the profile and white balance.

Any given photographer might prefer either version (or neither, of course), but the point is that with the Q2 or any color camera you get the choice of how you are going to use the color data to pick the presentation you want. It would have been difficult, if not impossible, to get the second image by simply adjusting exposure, contrast, black and white points, etc. if all you had to start with was the first image. The color info is necessary. With a monochrome camera, the second image would be much harder to achieve. An orange filter on the front of the lens would have come close by darkening the blues in the sky and allowing most of the greens in the statue to come through, but even that would have been noticeably different.

Now, here is the second picture from the Brooklyn Bridge. The first image is a straight desaturation, likely close to what you would see from an M10M...

And here is 5e same image with a different profile and white balance.

 

Again, you might prefer either one. That’s not the point. The point is that with the color camera you get the choice. While the differences are less dramatic with this second set (intentionally), there is certainly a different mood between the two. They don’t even feel like the same time of day.

I have not purchased a monochrome Leica despite the fantastic dynamic range and high signal-to-noise ratio at higher ISO’s and despite my love of B&W imaging specifically because of the comparative lack of flexibility. Sure, one could put color filters on the front of an M10M monochrome, but you still don’t get the range of choices that you do from a color camera, even when the intent is a black and white image.

Edited September 8, 2020 by Jared
Mostly typos