Black and white with M10 and M10 Monochrome

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

20 hours ago, SNJ Ops said:

I’m going to commit blasphemy here - recently I have been on Flickr looking at M11 B&W vs M11 M and while in a lot of cases I could tell them apart I also found myself preferring overall the B&W images coming out of the regular M11 over the M11 M. Many of the M11 M images were richer and more detailed yet that is exactly why I didn’t care for them. With one notable exception I saw a particular photographer paired his M11 M with Zeiss lenses and his images were wonderful. 
https://flickr.com/photos/21969384@N06

 

It’s always about the photographer.  Far too many variables to consider than just camera/lens, and online viewing obscures many of them.  

Jeff 

[pnwpotter]

On 1/18/2023 at 10:59 AM, Jeff S said:

I also own an M10-R, but my typical shooting conditions/style make high ISO/noise differences mostly insignificant for me. I question differences in dynamic range, but another difference is that the effective resolution for the M10M is significantly greater due to lack of color array; however,  I don’t print big enough, or crop to such an extent, to benefit.

Jeff

The differences between the M10M and M10R (as I have seen them) are ... M10M has a two stop jump on the M10R at high ISO, and it's look is also very film grain like at high ISO, which is quite lovely ... BUT if you don't have at least .7- compensation (or more) on all the time chances are you'll blow out highlights and never get them back. Especially during the day if there's sun. The M10R on the other hand has a neat trick of highlight recovery of at least two stops if faced with the same situation ... it's why I shoot the M10M at night, and M10R during the day using B&W settings. 

[Jeff S]

50 minutes ago, pnwpotter said:

The differences between the M10M and M10R (as I have seen them) are ... M10M has a two stop jump on the M10R at high ISO, and it's look is also very film grain like at high ISO, which is quite lovely ... BUT if you don't have at least .7- compensation (or more) on all the time chances are you'll blow out highlights and never get them back. Especially during the day if there's sun. The M10R on the other hand has a neat trick of highlight recovery of at least two stops if faced with the same situation ... it's why I shoot the M10M at night, and M10R during the day using B&W settings. 

I meter manually, without any automatic exposure compensation setting, and am careful not to blow highlights with all digital cameras, regardless of greater recovery flexibility when using color channels. Many years shooting color slide film, as well as B&W darkroom work, provided good lessons.

Jeff

[CP93]

Tangentially, I see little or no difference between M10R’s B&W jpgs and converting RAW to B&W in Lightroom. I’d love a Monochrom but can’t justify the expense for now.

[Jeff S]

18 hours ago, CP93 said:

Tangentially, I see little or no difference between M10R’s B&W jpgs and converting RAW to B&W in Lightroom. 

The difference is in the PP flexibility using DNG, with infinite rendering possibilities.  JPEG is just one interpretation.

Jeff

[CP93]

40 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

The difference is in the PP flexibility using DNG, with infinite rendering possibilities.  JPEG is just one interpretation.

Jeff

Yes, sorry, I was too succinct. I just meant between jpg sooc vs dng turned to b&w in Lightroom. I always shoot in raw, but as an experiment I added jpg monochrome as well and saw no appreciable advantage.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 minutes ago, CP93 said:

Yes, sorry, I was too succinct. I just meant between jpg sooc vs dng turned to b&w in Lightroom. I always shoot in raw, but as an experiment I added jpg monochrome as well and saw no appreciable advantage.

Depends on DNG import settings, which can be easily changed (and made default).

Jeff

 

[pnwpotter]

On 7/22/2024 at 2:11 PM, Jeff S said:

I meter manually, without any automatic exposure compensation setting, and am careful not to blow highlights with all digital cameras, regardless of greater recovery flexibility when using color channels. Many years shooting color slide film, as well as B&W darkroom work, provided good lessons.

Jeff

I also meter manually, but learned that compensation is a tool to help because (even though there is great shadow recovery with the M10M) how far do you want to go into the hole shadow wise?

And yes, I started shooting film in 1978, have had multiple darkrooms, printed fiber base papers that no longer exist (Oriental and Kodak Elite) and shot Kodachrome as my slide film of choice. I'm not a turnip off the truck. 

So now I shoot digital, Monochrome and Color, and these two cameras (M10M and M10R) couldn't make me happier.

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, pnwpotter said:

I also meter manually, but learned that compensation is a tool to help because (even though there is great shadow recovery with the M10M) how far do you want to go into the hole shadow wise?

And yes, I started shooting film in 1978, have had multiple darkrooms, printed fiber base papers that no longer exist (Oriental and Kodak Elite) and shot Kodachrome as my slide film of choice. I'm not a turnip off the truck. 

So now I shoot digital, Monochrome and Color, and these two cameras (M10M and M10R) couldn't make me happier.

I shoot with same two cameras; no problems shooting manual without  compensation.  No turnip either, starting in ‘74.  Whatever works.

Jeff

[mwktar]

On 1/25/2023 at 1:56 AM, sometimesmaybe said:

but my GAS... 😅 

how else am i supposed to improve my mediocre photography? by shooting more? by being more creative? 

 

*laughs nervously*

[Stevejack]

On 6/3/2024 at 2:15 PM, SNJ Ops said:

I’m going to commit blasphemy here - recently I have been on Flickr looking at M11 B&W vs M11 M and while in a lot of cases I could tell them apart I also found myself preferring overall the B&W images coming out of the regular M11 over the M11 M. Many of the M11 M images were richer and more detailed yet that is exactly why I didn’t care for them. With one notable exception I saw a particular photographer paired his M11 M with Zeiss lenses and his images were wonderful. 
https://flickr.com/photos/21969384@N06

 

That's interesting, I can't see it myself in my own work but sometimes I can in others depending on how they've processed it. Monochrom files are flatter and smoother out of camera and lack the punch that you get with the standard M10/11 colour converted files, so I notice that sometimes when people post pictures. 

In my own work I can't really tell my M10/M10M and M11/M11M files apart when I look at my final edits. For sure I can tell when I'm working on the files (the monochrom files are MUCH nicer to work with) but looking at the end result, no not usually. This is all because of how I edit, I work the files until they look how I want them to regardless of the camera / lens combination used.

I'm fairly certain that the differences you're seeing most of the time is more to do with lighting and final editing rather than anything inherent in the camera/lens combination. Other than vintage lenses, I can't tell when I have used the Zeiss / Leica APO / LLL / Voigtlander because the differences just don't stand out on an image by image basis. Side by side comparisons, yes I see differences, and sometimes in the rendering of lens flare / sunstars I'll pick it... but in most scenes unless I have that side by side comparison I can't tell. 

Edit: Whoops just realised this is an old thread that has been bumped - sorry SNJ Ops!

Edited February 21 by Stevejack