M11 or M11 Monochrome ?

[costa43]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just looking at the image quality from all my Leica M cameras, the most aesthetically pleasing so far is the m9m for me. I’ve not tried the m11m but I have tried the m10m.

[Advertisement]

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

[Jeff S]

The proof for me is in the prints. After adjusting my workflow with the M10 Monochrom, my M(9)M sits unused, despite its also great files. The M10 platform is also more robust, versatile and a pleasure to use compared to the M9-based version. The only thing lacking for me is the MM’s RAW-based histogram. 
 

Jeff

[hdmesa]

On 5/3/2023 at 3:16 AM, antonioxrosa said:

I sold my M10 and hesitating now between the M11 and the M11 Monochrome. I shoot b&w and the immediate answer would be Monochrome. However I have the following concern and I would appreciate others opinions.

Shooting in colour and move to b&w in post give me the opportunity to "simulate" colour filters by adjusting light in each colour channel, something I cann't do with the monochrome. I am also ware that with the monochrome I will gain more light and dynamic range but I will have to use external filters if I want for instance block some light on a blue sky.

Thoughts?

Thanks

António

I know this is a late response, but I think it may be helpful to others in the same situation:

Having owned both but only currently have the M11M:

M11:

• Can more easily get a darker/blacker sky with the b&w color sliders compared to a monochrome sensor.
• Heavy use of the blue/cyan sliders to get a black sky can leave an ugly glow at the horizon and/or unnatural-looking clouds, requiring masking, which gives mixed results.
• Recommend using a linear (dial in the strength by rotating) or circular polarizer (same but have to watch the angle of effect) to pre-darken skies and increase color saturation in anticipation of altering the color sliders later in post. This can greatly help overcome the previous issue and horizon glow artifact.
• Can add a nice punch of contrast where none exists by lightening yellow-orange-red sliders, which lightens dirt/gravel/flowers/objects in the image. This to me is the biggest benefit of the color conversion versus monochrome because it can make the land in the landscape pop at a very small detail level.

M11M:

• Can be difficult to get a fully black sky without a dark red filter and a perfectly dark blue sky.
• Red filter drawbacks are loss of dynamic range, loss of detail in the shadows, and longer exposure times and/or higher ISO (same difficulty that red filters cause with film).
• Darker skies derived from orange or red filtration may look more natural than black skies produces from color files, especially when it comes to cloud detail.
• Impervious to noise at extremely high ISOs. I recently shot with a light red filter and f/8-f/16, and the ISO went very high (handheld shooting); however, the resulting images had no more noise than low ISO images from the M11.

If your goal is to replicate the black sky effect of deep red color filtration on b&w film, I would go for the M11 over the M11M. If you want a more natural look and/or can use the high ISO benefits of the M11M, then I would go that route.

 

Edited August 15, 2023 by hdmesa

[Jeff S]

I agree that flexibility to use color sliders in PP is one factor that distinguishes a color-based M from a Monochrom. But achieving deep black skies doesn’t factor into my camera selection, as I find them unnatural and generally unappealing.  
 

Apologies to Ansel, but I prefer his very early prints of Moonrise, before he cranked up contrast in the darkroom.  The red filter alone didn’t produce the eventually severe black sky effect.  Of course the viewing public generally disagrees, and loves dramatic contrast.

https://www.andrewsmithgallery.com/exhibitions/anseladams/arrington/arrington_adams.html

I apply color sliders in PP with color-based cameras, and use glass color filters with a Monochrom (or b&w film), equally judiciously. For me, it’s the increased flexibility and convenience that comes with the color-based camera that matters, not the ability to achieve extreme effects.  
 

Nevertheless, my choice of color vs monochrome camera primarily comes down to shooting mindset, not so much the technical differences and results. But to each his/her own.
 

Jeff

Edited August 15, 2023 by Jeff S

[geotrupede]

mono all the way. 

I have been using a MM1 for a long while, upgrated to M11 colour. I can get close to the mm1, but it is not the same. the biggest issue is the latitude and the amount of data in the greys. my images have a very contrasty look and with the mm1 is simple to work with the files, they look great. with the MM1 1 is easy to break them, to start loose dark areas, etc. It can look very similar but it is not the same. And the digital filter are nothing like the real optical one. A red filter does not look the same as you are using 1/4th of the pixels, etc.

Why did i get the m11/ 

better machine, does not get stuck every 3 frames, reactive, great file quality (in colour), etc. modern garget with all the quality you would expect. At that time there was no MM11, plus i wanted something for colour too, to took the compromise. i can live with, but cash not being an issue and not needing colour I would go mono 100%.

`G.

 

[DadDadDaddyo]

My path-writ-large over the past decade or so went from, through, and to (in sequential order):

- Film-based Leicas (M bodies and inherited Barnacks), going back to the 60s,

- an all-in adoption of the Fujifilm X-Pro series (owing largely to their kinesthetic similarities to the Leicas),

- an all-in adoption of the Fujifilm GFX series,

- a partial return to Leica M bodies starting with the M246 Monochrom (accompanied by adoption of the SL series for color and zoom situations),

- replacing the M246 with an M10M,

- and now arriving at a happy point of blissful ownership and use of both an M11 and an M11M.

Of the previous systems mentioned above, all that remains in my stable are the film-based Leicas (IIIc, IIIg, and two M4s), an SL2, two SL primes and two SL zooms, and the M11 and M11M, plus all the Leica glass accumulated over the past 50+ years, in both thread mount and M mount.

Everything else has been sold as (or shortly after) the steps described took place, and that has helped finance the whole sequence.

My overall equipment footprint has shrunk with reduced redundancy, and my planning and decision-making prior to photography excursions has undergone considerable simplification. 

Well, not completely...

I also still have (and will probably never part with) a reasonable Hasselblad setup (one body, three lenses, five backs) for Medium Format, as well as Large Format bodies of 4x5, 5x7, and 8x10, along with the darkroom equipment needed to process all those film sizes, an enlarger for up to 4x5, an Imacon Precision II scanner that can go up to 5x7, and my beloved Canon ImagePROGRAF Pro-2000. 

No fishing boat, no airplane, no golf clubs, no gun collection. 

I'm a pretty happy retired guy....

Edited August 17, 2023 by DadDadDaddyo

[Steadimann]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Could anyone having M11M and M11 share DNG files for comparison? Ideally a portrait. Wanna see what are the real difference with same lens, just purely Mono camera..

[M11 for me]

vor 22 Minuten schrieb Steadimann:

Could anyone having M11M and M11 share DNG files for comparison? Ideally a portrait. Wanna see what are the real difference with same lens, just purely Mono camera..

In normal lighting you will probably see no difference.

If you do not need high ISO (abobe 12'600) then the M11 is probably more versatile. Further you can play around with the colour channels in your b&w image of the M11 which is not possible with the monochrome. Finally the monochrome is prone to blow out highlights; there is nothing to save once a detail is gone (unlike the M11 that is more forgiving). At the end you always need light to make photographs so that the high ISO capabilities are somehow relative.

I made a few pictures with identic perspective with M11 and M11 Monochrome in daylight. I cannot see any difference. When playing with the colours you can archieve exactly the same result.

[robsonj]

5 hours ago, M11 for me said:

In normal lighting you will probably see no difference.

If you do not need high ISO (abobe 12'600) then the M11 is probably more versatile. Further you can play around with the colour channels in your b&w image of the M11 which is not possible with the monochrome. Finally the monochrome is prone to blow out highlights; there is nothing to save once a detail is gone (unlike the M11 that is more forgiving). At the end you always need light to make photographs so that the high ISO capabilities are somehow relative.

I made a few pictures with identic perspective with M11 and M11 Monochrome in daylight. I cannot see any difference. When playing with the colours you can archieve exactly the same result.

For me the monochrom (be it m10m, m11m, q2m) produces tonality that you cannot get from an m10 or m11. There is also more detail for me from the m11m, it’s verging on medium format detail in a relatively tiny package… for me. I own a m11 and m11m, both fantastic

[Jon Warwick]

4 hours ago, robsonj said:

For me the monochrom (be it m10m, m11m, q2m) produces tonality that you cannot get from an m10 or m11. There is also more detail for me from the m11m, it’s verging on medium format detail in a relatively tiny package… for me. I own a m11 and m11m, both fantastic

Fully agree. For me, it’s not so much “how much” the sensor of the Monochrom captures, it’s rather “how” it captures it - which I think is with better tonality, and with no micro blurring from a color filter array (meaning the Monochroms record textures better. The textures, for me, look more real and more alive). Also with the Monochroms, no issues with moire etc.

Edited January 17, 2024 by Jon Warwick

[nemendes]

11 hours ago, Steadimann said:

Could anyone having M11M and M11 share DNG files for comparison? Ideally a portrait. Wanna see what are the real difference with same lens, just purely Mono camera..

For a portrait work, M11M is better tonality and details. If you really want to take portrait shots b&w, monochrom should be your choice. It is not so much different than taking portrait with m11 and turn them into b&w but there is. Mostly your way of thinking is changing so its priceless experience. 

For example for street photography sometimes i shoot with m11 and turn them into b&w, because i dont need much tonality, especially grey area, i just want to see dark areas more. M11M gives me much detail that i have to arrange my photos on lightroom for getting darker shots  

If you like shooting b&w, in my opinion you should really try monochrom, especially for dramatic portraits. 

[M11 for me]

vor einer Stunde schrieb nemendes:

Mostly your way of thinking is changing

To me this is the myin point. Definitely: You think differently. You have no color. 

But the other arguments I cannot share. Its not my experience. Plus there is that thing with blown out highlights. 

[Steadimann]

Hey all

So i am still back at the same question  could somebody having M11 and M11M take a picture with both with same lens, same setting etc to have a direct comparison to see rendering difference? I am not keen on high iso difference, that is clear, my main question is how does it differ in portraits everything else being the same... 

[M11 for me]

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!

[fenykepesz]

Grüezi @M11 for me in Wittnau, i assume the upper photo is the M11M picture, while the lower one is its converted M11 equivalent - am i right, or wrong ?

in any case, is there a way we could get access to your original DNG files and do our comparisons on our own processing pipelines we are familiar with ?

very nice village, by the way !  thank you for such fond memories about good old CH ! where is it located ? what river flows under the bridge ? bye, pisti

Edited January 17, 2024 by fenykepesz

[M11 for me]

Hi, What a nice Anrede 😄

But you are right. Is it the tree on the left that told you? The one in the image below is a bit harsh. It's a question of Lightroom Classic. I should have done better . . .

[fenykepesz]

nop, not so much the tree with its leaves - but rather the bright high-light areas you had mentioned, they appear a bit more controlled in the lower M11 picture.  obviously that could also just be a question of the given contrast settings.

in general i feel that the upper picture is kind of flatter while the lower one is more modelled, textured, sculptured, there is more relief in its surface there.   ultimately there must be more information in the contrast domain with 48bit as compared to 16bit, right ?

i am beginning to wonder now how a third version of your picture looked if it was color-to-gray converted using a focal pixel-by-pixel-based conversion technique ?  your two M11M and M11 DNG files (or neutral=raw TIFF/PNG files) would tell us...

tschüß !

[robsonj]

2 hours ago, fenykepesz said:

Grüezi @M11 for me in Wittnau, i assume the upper photo is the M11M picture, while the lower one is its converted M11 equivalent - am i right, or wrong ?

in any case, is there a way we could get access to your original DNG files and do our comparisons on our own processing pipelines we are familiar with ?

very nice village, by the way !  thank you for such fond memories about good old CH ! where is it located ? what river flows under the bridge ? bye, pisti

This was my thought also, top is monochrom 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Derbyshire Man]

Currently I have a Q2Mono and M11-P. I love the Q2M, happy with 28mm focal length, combined with f1.7 it produces interesting shots. It's also a low light monster due to being mono, f1.7 and lens stabilisation. I'm about 95% mono and have produced plenty of mono shots with my M11-P that I'm really happy with.

I considered M11M rather than M11-P but for me, I value seeing the image in B&W while photographing, yes I can imagine what it will look like but I prefer to see it. When I used SLRs & B&W film I often used a red filter to give a monochrome image via the viewfinder rather than contrast reasons.

I think the only thing that would tempt me is a M12M-evf version, I really love the optical rangefinder for the colour camera but I'd happily swap to Q2M EVF or better for an M sized B&W specialist camera. My guess is the market for a camera like that is tiny so I have very little expectation of ever seeing one.

Before you ask, I have a visoflex; it's ugly and doesn't fit well in the bag mounted, these are just my views and I don't seek to impose them on anyone!

In summary though a Q2M and M11-P is a dream combination as it is!

[M11 for me]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Derbyshire Man:

red filter to give a monochrome image via the viewfinder rather than contrast reasons

Good point: You might want to use filters with B&W camera. Not needed for M11.