Jump to content

Dilemma: Q2 and/or Q2 Monochrom?


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

23 hours ago, acg69 said:

Such a heated discussion... Jeez:)

So let me add to the heat a bit if I may! My comments are not meant to be inflammatory or insulting, but if you take them as such, please know that this is NOT my intention.......

We can argue until the cows come home about the Q2M helping us see / think in B&W but the real test would be to see images that somehow exude that native, from zero to infinity, B&W mentality exclusively afforded to the photographer because they were HOLDING a monochrome camera:)

Again, I sincerely apologise if anyone is offended by my comments, certainly this was not my intention. We are here to talk and help each other and share experiences and showcase our work with our tools of choice. To that end, my work (recently with the Q2 and before that with many other cameras mentioned on my site) can be seen at writelight.net, among other places.

Happy shooting (with whatever you happen to be carrying!)

Terrific thoughtful post. Appreciated! And, BTW, I am nowhere near rich! I don’t smoke or drink etc. (that’s a standard rationalization too!) so I can easily convince myself of purity of motive and justification... ☺️ Thank you!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I have both the Q2 and the Q2M.  @leicameech is right, they make a great combination.  I recently visited Corfe Castle (SW England) and you get the best view climbing a steep (and I mean really steep) hill on the opposite side of the road.  On this occasion I didn't take the Q2 for colour, but rather the SL2 and a couple of lenses, so the bag was heavy.  For black and white I had my Q2M.   Here are two photos taken from the same position: SL2 with 75mm APO Summicron for colour and Q2M cropp

I pre-visualized this a few hours ago...Ansel Adams didn't help me at all: but a Q2M did.     Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!

I am coming around to the more natural skies as well, allowing myself the freedom of that interpretation. Not every b&w sky has to look like it was taken on the moon  Last week I took only the M10M with me on a business trip to Taos, and I enjoyed using it for vacation-style photos, just snapping away at anything I found interesting. I'm still relearning how to think in b&w, in particular learning how the M10M interprets color into b&w and adjusting my thinking to match. My inst

Posted Images

48 minutes ago, T25UFO said:

 

I hate this type of sarcasm - seemingly apologising for having an infinitely superior level of intelligence.  Not clever, not clever at all.

 

Well, let us all be thankful for that.  Now perhaps we can all get back to doing what people on this forum actually like to do - taking photographs.

 

Yeah, whatever:)

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Richard K said:

Terrific thoughtful post. Appreciated! And, BTW, I am nowhere near rich! I don’t smoke or drink etc. (that’s a standard rationalization too!) so I can easily convince myself of purity of motive and justification... ☺️ Thank you!

You are welcome! Now let's get back to the business of taking enlightened B&W photographs with our beloved toys, shall we? 

I am making a point that, I realize, is hard to accept. Didn't have any illusions about that. In any case, let's agree to disagree and let's all get out and make images (B&W or color) with whatever we happen to be carrying at the time. And let's share images so we can prove the points we are making and drive the collective knowledge here higher. Not interested to argue with you or anyone else for that matter. Happy shooting:)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, T25UFO said:

Ah . . . two more posts so you broke your promise twice.  You are so easy to provoke 🤣🤣

I know, life of the party. And pathological liar. Oh, and let's not forget flame thrower and photographer. How about you?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, T25UFO said:

I hate this type of sarcasm - seemingly apologising for having an infinitely superior level of intelligence.  Not clever, not clever at all...

  @T25UFO Agreed. 

Sarcasm is one thing; the only superiority I see in our brethren's faux apology and other posts is an infinitely superior level of narcissism and arrogance.

Carry on. 😊

Edited by Herr Barnack
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Advertisement (gone after registration)

26 minutes ago, acg69 said:

I know, life of the party. And pathological liar. Oh, and let's not forget flame thrower and photographer. How about you?

Me?  What do I do?

I read Greek tragedy which is defined as a play which the protagonist, usually a person of importance and outstanding personal qualities, falls to disaster through a combination of a personal failing and circumstances with which he or she cannot deal.

But you will know all about that, being from Athens.

Edited by T25UFO
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, robert_parker said:

... I've got some Narcissists in a pot on my patio - as long as you keep them watered, they look great.... 🌻☺️👍

But whatever you do, don't water the narcissists growing in the L-Camera-Forum pot! 😳

Edited by Herr Barnack
Link to post
Share on other sites

Gee, you boys saw right through me! Interesting how you need a Q2M to see in B&W... Show images. Not words. (incidentally you are not really good with words, hope you are better with images).

Being in Athens, I will go to sleep now to feed my NPD, but I guess you know that already. And as for Greek tragedy, did you get the wikipedia definition? 

Images gentlemen, show your work with the tolls you have and leave the battles or wits to others.

Good night;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, acg69 said:

And as for Greek tragedy, did you get the wikipedia definition? 

Not wikipedia, although I'm sure you will find it there as well.  It just seemed appropriate.

If you are genuinely interested then check out Gregory Nagy.  He is always interesting and thought provoking.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hdmesa said:

That would put you well behind most of us here, wouldn't it? 🤫

 

Possibly. The point being...?

If you feel you can put your experience to good use and show me what is meant here by the hypothesis that a monochrome camera somehow influences the input by enabling (or any other verb you prefer) the shooter to see / think in B&W, I would kindly ask you to do so. I mean this, so we can hopefully move beyond the smartass remarks and actually learn something.

I still maintain that the monochrome is only about the output for technical reasons that we all know. If a photographer has been shooting B&W long enough, he or she knows if a story is better told in color or B&W without even using the camera to decide on the composition. Then, by using any camera and setting it to show a B&W image in the EVF or LCD, they can fill in the gaps of their imagination and fine-tune the process.

I am attaching an image I took (albeit not with a Leica) some years ago, when doing a series on the ancient Temple of Poseidon at Cape Sounio in Greece. This image was conceived as a b&W from the beginning. The story is the light through the columns and to bring it forward without distractions (e.g. from the sky), B&W was the way to go.

The other two images are from the same set but they were conceived as color shots. The story is the simplicity of the columns (in form and color) vs. the light play of the clouds in the sky. Obviously, this story is better told in color, at least for my taste.

What I am saying is that if I had a Q2M in hand that day, that first shot may have been better in terms of tonality and overall IQ, but I do not see how and in what way it would have helped my thinking process in deciding which story is better told in what way. Can someone please show what they mean or at least try to describe it in a way that will make it easier to comprehend?

Again - I am not here to argue for the sake of arguing guys. We share the same passion and we can disagree on issues, but I find it way more interesting to explore what each other has to say so that we can all get better. I, with my 40 years of photography and possibly you too with your many years more too:) (this is a joke, no need to comment on this, really!)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, acg69 said:

Possibly. The point being...?

If you feel you can put your experience to good use and show me what is meant here by the hypothesis that a monochrome camera somehow influences the input by enabling (or any other verb you prefer) the shooter to see / think in B&W, I would kindly ask you to do so. I mean this, so we can hopefully move beyond the smartass remarks and actually learn something.

I still maintain that the monochrome is only about the output for technical reasons that we all know. If a photographer has been shooting B&W long enough, he or she knows if a story is better told in color or B&W without even using the camera to decide on the composition. Then, by using any camera and setting it to show a B&W image in the EVF or LCD, they can fill in the gaps of their imagination and fine-tune the process.

I am attaching an image I took (albeit not with a Leica) some years ago, when doing a series on the ancient Temple of Poseidon at Cape Sounio in Greece. This image was conceived as a b&W from the beginning. The story is the light through the columns and to bring it forward without distractions (e.g. from the sky), B&W was the way to go.

The other two images are from the same set but they were conceived as color shots. The story is the simplicity of the columns (in form and color) vs. the light play of the clouds in the sky. Obviously, this story is better told in color, at least for my taste.

What I am saying is that if I had a Q2M in hand that day, that first shot may have been better in terms of tonality and overall IQ, but I do not see how and in what way it would have helped my thinking process in deciding which story is better told in what way. Can someone please show what they mean or at least try to describe it in a way that will make it easier to comprehend?

Again - I am not here to argue for the sake of arguing guys. We share the same passion and we can disagree on issues, but I find it way more interesting to explore what each other has to say so that we can all get better. I, with my 40 years of photography and possibly you too with your many years more too:) (this is a joke, no need to comment on this, really!)

 

Think I like the third photo best.  Nice subject, nice composition, nice sky, just about the right balance of shadow detail.  I would probably have straightened the verticals, but that's just me. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, T25UFO said:

Think I like the third photo best.  Nice subject, nice composition, nice sky, just about the right balance of shadow detail.  I would probably have straightened the verticals, but that's just me. 

Thank you. I see your point about the verticals - I did straighten the horizon (look at where the sea meets the sky).

The point I am trying to make is how the same (sort of) subject can be conveyed in both color and B&W depending on the story one wants to tell and I believe that this is doable in the mind of the photographer without any external help, save for looking at a B&W EVF for finetuning.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, acg69 said:

Possibly. The point being...?

If you feel you can put your experience to good use and show me what is meant here by the hypothesis that a monochrome camera somehow influences the input by enabling (or any other verb you prefer) the shooter to see / think in B&W, I would kindly ask you to do so. I mean this, so we can hopefully move beyond the smartass remarks and actually learn something.

I still maintain that the monochrome is only about the output for technical reasons that we all know. If a photographer has been shooting B&W long enough, he or she knows if a story is better told in color or B&W without even using the camera to decide on the composition. Then, by using any camera and setting it to show a B&W image in the EVF or LCD, they can fill in the gaps of their imagination and fine-tune the process.

I am attaching an image I took (albeit not with a Leica) some years ago, when doing a series on the ancient Temple of Poseidon at Cape Sounio in Greece. This image was conceived as a b&W from the beginning. The story is the light through the columns and to bring it forward without distractions (e.g. from the sky), B&W was the way to go.

The other two images are from the same set but they were conceived as color shots. The story is the simplicity of the columns (in form and color) vs. the light play of the clouds in the sky. Obviously, this story is better told in color, at least for my taste.

What I am saying is that if I had a Q2M in hand that day, that first shot may have been better in terms of tonality and overall IQ, but I do not see how and in what way it would have helped my thinking process in deciding which story is better told in what way. Can someone please show what they mean or at least try to describe it in a way that will make it easier to comprehend?

Again - I am not here to argue for the sake of arguing guys. We share the same passion and we can disagree on issues, but I find it way more interesting to explore what each other has to say so that we can all get better. I, with my 40 years of photography and possibly you too with your many years more too:) (this is a joke, no need to comment on this, really!)

 

TLDR. Nice photos, though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...