Considering a Monochrom Body - Looking for advice

[tegel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Background:

I don't own a Leica and the closest I've come to using a rangefinder camera was a Fuji X-Pro2 a few years back (even then, I preferred the EVF over the OVF).  I do like small cameras/lenses especially for travel as I like to explore on foot and carry my gear in a small shoulder bag. My current camera for travel is a Nikon Zf.  Here, I define "travel" as going someplace on vacation with my spouse where photography will occur, but not the primary focus of the trip.  We typically go on extended hikes in parks or long walks in urban areas, carrying our camera gear for an entire day.  For the more photo-centric trips involving things like wildlife, majestic landscapes, and astro photography, I load up my Nikon Z8 with the appropriate Nikon lenses (from 14mm to 800mm) into a backpack with large tripod.  

Reason for my post:

In the constant pursuit of getting smaller with travel in mind, I recently purchased two Leica M lenses. 35 and 50mm Summicrons (ASPH v1) along with a Voigtlander 90mm f/2.8 APO-Skopar. I love how small they are and they work great on the Zf with the Voigt M to Z adapter (with close focusing capabilities). Now that I have them, I'm thinking it might make sense to get an M body. The question, of course, is which one?  I don't necessarily need the latest/greatest M11 as my Z8 covers my high MP needs.  I don't think the IQ of an M10 will be much different than my Zf with older models (M240, M9) probably being a step backwards.  So, that leads me towards the M10m.  I enjoy shooting in B&W, so the idea of a dedicated camera for that appeals to me.

The question I have is how much of an improvement will I see compared to the monochrome images I get from my Zf.  I understand the differences in the sensors, but short of buying one, is there a way to have some sense of what to expect and will it be worth the investment. I tried looking at charts on the Photons to Photos website to see if they might help me. From what I can tell, the Zf seems to hold it's own against the M10m and M11n in terms of dynamic range and shadow recovery, and seems to be significantly better than the older monochom cameras.  Here are two charts I used to try to assess this:

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!

 

I included all of the Leica Monochrome models to get a sense for how they all compare to each other. I don't know exactly how to read these charts other than "that looks better to me", if there other charts that would be helpful or if it even makes sense to compare color and monochrome sensors in this way.

Anyway, my apologies for the long-winded post.  Any insight folks here might have is appreciated.

Thanks,

Tom

 

 

Edited July 31 by tegel

[Advertisement]

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

[frame-it]

or instead of spending $10k, spend $300 and get your DF converted to monochrome.

[kenf]

1 hour ago, frame-it said:

or instead of spending $10k, spend $300 and get your DF converted to monochrome.

Is that accurate?  I was quoted five times that to convert a X100S.

[tegel]

1 hour ago, frame-it said:

or instead of spending $10k, spend $300 and get your DF converted to monochrome.

If I had Df, I might consider that. I came here looking for insight on Leica monochrom cameras, not for advice on how to spend my money.

 

Edited August 1 by tegel

[GFW2-SCUSA]

 I would not shy away from a M monochrome 240. I have that as well as an M10 M and find they both are  excellent.  The advantage to me of the M10 M is it is smaller and more comfortable.  As far as image quality both are very fine. I have never used a Q of any kind, but the Q mono is highly regarded. I have been using Leica rangefinders since the 1960's so they are second nature to me. But many find the transition to be challenging. You might consider renting one for a week and see if it is indeed what you want. 

 

[tegel]

11 minutes ago, GFW2-SCUSA said:

 I would not shy away from a M monochrome 240. I have that as well as an M10 M and find they both are  excellent.  The advantage to me of the M10 M is it is smaller and more comfortable.  As far as image quality both are very fine. I have never used a Q of any kind, but the Q mono is highly regarded. I have been using Leica rangefinders since the 1960's so they are second nature to me. But many find the transition to be challenging. You might consider renting one for a week and see if it is indeed what you want. 

 

Thanks for your reply. I realize that both are excellent, but it seems that the Zf is right up there with them (at least according to the P2P charts). I did look into renting, but my local shops don’t rent Leicas and the other place I’ve used (LensRentals/BorrowLenses) only seems to rent the current models. I suppose that I could rent a M11m, but then I’m afraid what might happen to my bank account 😏.

[LeicaR10]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Tegel,  As you will soon read, there are photographers who will offer their sage advice to include myself.  I own/used all the M Monochrom cameras and each generation, these are improving with various features and sensor capabilities.  In the case of the M10-M, its a superb camera and does great with creating images with very good shadow recovery.  The M11-M, it does better with shadow recovery.  There are a number of videos that discuss the pros/cons of each model on You Tube.  I use my M11-M for landscape photography as I did with the M10-M.  Frankly, in the early days of the M11 model, I went back to the M10-R and M10-M due to firmware hiccups in the early stages of the models.  These have since been resolved via firmware updates.  Using the M10 or M11 Monchroms create freedom at least for me, when I am hiking in very challenging terrain and environments.  I do not miss the weight of mirrorless SLR type cameras.  The good news you have choices and ultimately it will be your decision.  Below is a link to an article that describes using the M camera for landscape photography.  At my young age and 50+ years of using Leicas of all systems, the M camera excels in my quest for creating landscape photographs.   Hope this helps.  r/ Mark

Try:  https://www.macfilos.com/2024/04/10/jeremys-year-shooting-landscape-with-the-leica-m11-rangefinder/

[frame-it]

1 hour ago, tegel said:

I came here looking for insight on Leica monochrom cameras, not for advice on how to spend my money.

 

in that case, just get an m11m and be happy with the dynamic range, and stop complaining about your bank account.

[tegel]

22 minutes ago, frame-it said:

in that case, just get an m11m and be happy with the dynamic range, and stop complaining about your bank account.

It always puzzles me when people feel the need to reply to a topic even though they have nothing useful to contribute. Maybe it was an attempt at humor? 

[tegel]

39 minutes ago, LeicaR10 said:

Tegel,  As you will soon read, there are photographers who will offer their sage advice to include myself.  I own/used all the M Monochrom cameras and each generation, these are improving with various features and sensor capabilities.  In the case of the M10-M, its a superb camera and does great with creating images with very good shadow recovery.  The M11-M, it does better with shadow recovery.  There are a number of videos that discuss the pros/cons of each model on You Tube.  I use my M11-M for landscape photography as I did with the M10-M.  Frankly, in the early days of the M11 model, I went back to the M10-R and M10-M due to firmware hiccups in the early stages of the models.  These have since been resolved via firmware updates.  Using the M10 or M11 Monchroms create freedom at least for me, when I am hiking in very challenging terrain and environments.  I do not miss the weight of mirrorless SLR type cameras.  The good news you have choices and ultimately it will be your decision.  Below is a link to an article that describes using the M camera for landscape photography.  At my young age and 50+ years of using Leicas of all systems, the M camera excels in my quest for creating landscape photographs.   Hope this helps.  r/ Mark

Try:  https://www.macfilos.com/2024/04/10/jeremys-year-shooting-landscape-with-the-leica-m11-rangefinder/

Thanks for your reply, and the link to the article. I've seen a bunch of YT videos and have read many articles, so I'm somewhat familiar how the different M models compare to each other.  I have not seen many articles comparing the M10m or M11m sensor to Nikon Z sensors (Reid reviews did  review on the Z7, but it was mostly about adapting Leica lenses and the effects of the sensor stack thickness). I am a bit confused as to the consensus that the M11m recovers shadows better than the M10m as the P2P Shadow Improvement Chart seems to indicate otherwise. Maybe I'm interpreting that chart incorrectly or maybe the data is bad?  Or maybe there is not much difference at all and the choice comes downs to if you prefer using a RF camera or not. If that's the case, it's okay, but it would be good to have that information to help set expectations.

[LeicaR10]

Tegel,  Like you, I have not seen any articles comparing the Monchrom sensors to the Nikon Z sensors.  You most likely read the comparison on Reid's site comparing the M10-M to the M11-M etc., where the M10-M does exceptionally well.  IMO, if one wants to stay with Leica Monochrom cameras, as I use to tell my workshop clients, get a mint M10-M, save some money and go create exceptional photographs.  For me, I don't get hung up on charts.  I personally go by my experience and resulting photographs.  With the Leica Monochroms one really can't find much fault for what they are at the time of fielding.  I can't help with the Nikon Z sensors, but maybe others will chime in with their experience.  Your OP thread is very fresh.   r/ Mark

Edited August 1 by LeicaR10

[Chris W]

8 hours ago, tegel said:

Background:

I don't own a Leica and the closest I've come to using a rangefinder camera was a Fuji X-Pro2 a few years back (even then, I preferred the EVF over the OVF). 

To be honest the biggest issue you are going to have is adjusting from Nikon to a rangefinder M. No current Fuji camera is even close.

So I would look at borrowing or renting any semi-recent M body and giving the system a proper try out. You may just hate using a proper rangefinder (colour or B&W).

The latest and greatest M bodies don't add up for me (cost vs benefit). I have a standard M10 and I would like to add an M246 (the 240 monochrome mentioned earlier).

'mathphotographer' on Youtube did a great side by side exhaustive test between the M246 and M10M and the differences were quite marginal. The M246 was slightly preferable in some instances. I'm sure the M11M is the pinnacle of b&w Leica, but I don't have that kind of money fora niche camera (niche for me).

First step in this process is to try a proper rangefinder camera though.

 

Edited August 1 by Chris W
Spelling

[espelt]

I'm not a fan of too much theory and diagrams. When it comes to photography, I'm more of a practical person. Just try something and see if I like it. For a long time, I used only analog cameras and film. Almost exclusively in black and white. At some point, I had a flight coming up, and I realized that traveling with film can cause problems at many airports. So I got a digital M. A Monochrom 246. And I realized: This is my camera. I'm not talking about the subtle differences or improvements in later models like the 10 or 11. I'm talking about the principle. And for me, that's not even based on the technology. It's mainly in the fact that you can only shoot in black and white with the camera. A limitation that, like when working with film, forces you to see things a little differently. You look at subjects differently, pay different attention to the light, and look more consciously for high-contrast situations. This may not be something that comes naturally right away. But after a while, it works better and better. What really makes a technical difference is the Monochrom's ISO capability. Are the photos different or better than those converted to black and white from a color camera? That's sometimes hard to say. I studied repro technology as a profession. And I'm good with Photoshop. I can actually produce a good black and white version of any good color photo. On screen or as a small print, for example, in a photo book, you'll hardly notice any difference. No one will say, "Wow, that's a shot from an M Monochrom." However, the data from the Monochrom reveals its potential with large prints. Things get really exciting from A3 onwards. The question of how often you'll make such large prints is something everyone has to answer for themselves. I chose the 246 back then. Firstly, because it was simply an experiment. I wasn't really sure if it was right for me. And secondly, of course, because of the budget. A completely new one would have been impossible. But I couldn't really justify the M10 either. One more important point: If you decide to go with the monochrome camera, no matter which one, you should only consider the JPGs from the camera as preliminary information. And then forget about them. The potential lies in the RAW files. Once you've found your workflow, they can be converted quite quickly for the appropriate output. But you must/should always adjust a few settings. Tonal correction, gradation curve—that sort of thing. The image data has a tonal richness reminiscent of ultra-fine-grain film. And that's why the images straight out of the camera often appear a bit dull, gray, or a bit dark.

My conclusion: What really remains in the end is the thing about vision and the slightly different approach to photography that makes the difference. Or can make it.

And of course: The camera is simply stunningly beautiful. Matte black, no logos, no lettering...

[IkarusJohn]

To be honest, I don’t think there is a sensible comparison between a colour digital Nikon (of any stripe) and a Leica monochrome.  They are just different things, and no graph or test is going to tell you how that feels when you take a picture.  

If you search the forum for Jono Slack’s reviews on the release of each of the original Monochrom, the M(246), M10-M and M11-M, you’ll get the idea.  There’s also the fruit and vege man for more in depth reviews - I don’t find him anywhere near as hellpful, but you might.

From my own experience, the original Monochrom (based on the M9 platform) is a keeper, despite its annoying shutter sound and “only” 18MP.  Why?  Well, it has a histogram based on the DNG file, and the resolution (without the Bayer Filter Array) feels more like 30MP.  But what won me over my initial scepticism was the wonderful files - flat out of the camera, but with minimal processing, they really shine.

I haven’t used the later versions, but when mine dies, I will look for an M10-M, assuming I can’t find a mint Monochrom.  My favourite, and most used M camera.

[tegel]

5 hours ago, Chris W said:

To be honest the biggest issue you are going to have is adjusting from Nikon to a rangefinder M. No current Fuji camera is even close.

So I would look at borrowing or renting any semi-recent M body and giving the system a proper try out. You may just hate using a proper rangefinder (colour or B&W).

The latest and greatest M bodies don't add up for me (cost vs benefit). I have a standard M10 and I would like to add an M246 (the 240 monochrome mentioned earlier).

'mathphotographer' on Youtube did a great side by side exhaustive test between the M246 and M10M and the differences were quite marginal. The M246 was slightly preferable in some instances. I'm sure the M11M is the pinnacle of b&w Leica, but I don't have that kind of money fora niche camera (niche for me).

First step in this process is to try a proper rangefinder camera though.

 

Thanks for your advice. I have briefly played with a RF camera a few times, but I agree that I need to really spend some time with one. I’m grew up shooting film in the 70s-80s so I’m used to shooting with the split prism focus screen on my Nikon film cameras. Using the RF patch seems similar enough (focus, recompose, shoot) and it might even be easier as sometimes I find it difficult to tell if the split prism is always lined up correctly. Right now, I’m just exploring the idea. My Nikon Zf is meeting all of my needs, but I’ve always had a curosity about what its like to shoot with a rangefinder. Another idea is to sign up for a Leica workshop where they have cameras you can borrow. The Phil Penman NYC 3-day masterclass sounds interesting, as it would give me an opportunity to use a RF, directly compare it to what I use now and, best if all learn a few things about photography in the process. 

[mpauliks]

Did you take a look at the Cobalt emulations for monochrom Ms? My first digital Leica was M 246. Today I would emulate it. But this is only me. There are differences of course. https://www.cobalt-image.com/?v=5f02f0889301

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!

[mpauliks]

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!

This is emulating M246 on SL2-S using Cobalt. To me fully sufficient.

[davysn]

 It is unlikely that a person would have two monochrome cameras, so making a careful decision is the right thing to do. 

When you choose the M246, even if the M11M is better (a very personal and subjective judgment), your desire to switch won't be strong, unless you have so much money that you don't know what to do with it. 

I have the M246 and the M11. My experience is that I have used the M246 far more than the M11. So, I have no desire to switch from the M246.

Edited August 1 by davysn

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[espelt]

vor 27 Minuten schrieb mpauliks:

Did you take a look at the Cobalt emulations for monochrom Ms?

Nice. It's similar to the many presets. One press of a button - and the image looks like... You can try it out. And see if you can handle it. If you don't like Photoshop or find it too complicated - certainly a way. Mine doesn't anymore. I like the Monochrom mainly because it gives me the feeling of getting close to the old, almost grainless large-format prints. Wonderful, almost infinite tonal values. If I want really visible grain, which I also find very appealing depending on the subject, then I use the M2 or the screw-mount Leica with a Tri-X or HP 5 and plenty of Rodinal. You can certainly simulate it. SilverEffex does a pretty good job. But it's not the same as taking the shot with a 90-year-old screw-mount Leica. It's simply unbeatable....

[tegel]

5 hours ago, espelt said:

I'm not a fan of too much theory and diagrams. When it comes to photography, I'm more of a practical person. Just try something and see if I like it. For a long time, I used only analog cameras and film. Almost exclusively in black and white. At some point, I had a flight coming up, and I realized that traveling with film can cause problems at many airports. So I got a digital M. A Monochrom 246. And I realized: This is my camera. I'm not talking about the subtle differences or improvements in later models like the 10 or 11. I'm talking about the principle. And for me, that's not even based on the technology. It's mainly in the fact that you can only shoot in black and white with the camera. A limitation that, like when working with film, forces you to see things a little differently. You look at subjects differently, pay different attention to the light, and look more consciously for high-contrast situations. This may not be something that comes naturally right away. But after a while, it works better and better. What really makes a technical difference is the Monochrom's ISO capability. Are the photos different or better than those converted to black and white from a color camera? That's sometimes hard to say. I studied repro technology as a profession. And I'm good with Photoshop. I can actually produce a good black and white version of any good color photo. On screen or as a small print, for example, in a photo book, you'll hardly notice any difference. No one will say, "Wow, that's a shot from an M Monochrom." However, the data from the Monochrom reveals its potential with large prints. Things get really exciting from A3 onwards. The question of how often you'll make such large prints is something everyone has to answer for themselves. I chose the 246 back then. Firstly, because it was simply an experiment. I wasn't really sure if it was right for me. And secondly, of course, because of the budget. A completely new one would have been impossible. But I couldn't really justify the M10 either. One more important point: If you decide to go with the monochrome camera, no matter which one, you should only consider the JPGs from the camera as preliminary information. And then forget about them. The potential lies in the RAW files. Once you've found your workflow, they can be converted quite quickly for the appropriate output. But you must/should always adjust a few settings. Tonal correction, gradation curve—that sort of thing. The image data has a tonal richness reminiscent of ultra-fine-grain film. And that's why the images straight out of the camera often appear a bit dull, gray, or a bit dark.

My conclusion: What really remains in the end is the thing about vision and the slightly different approach to photography that makes the difference. Or can make it.

And of course: The camera is simply stunningly beautiful. Matte black, no logos, no lettering...

Thanks for your thoughtful reply. With my Zf I shoot in B&W probably 90% of the time and try to force myself to see things in terms of light and shadows. In B&W mode, it still creates a full color RAW image, but overlays the B&W “Picture Control” in the EVF and in the JPG image when reviewing images. When processing in LR, the image also appears as B&W with the selected picture control overlayed. When using these PCs, you do not have access to the color channels, so in that respect the editing process is similar to that of an image from a monochome sensor (if you switch to Adobe Monochome, the color channels become available). One of the built-in PCs is called Flat Monochome and I read somewhere that it is similar to what you get from a monochrome sensor, so that would be an intersting comparison.  I should probably work with that a bit more to learn  how to process flat images. It sounds like I’m in a similar situation as you were in that I’m not sure if a Leica M monochrom is right for me. I suppose I’ll never really know until I try one out. I do print regularly (up to 13x19) so I am certainly interested in what a monochrome sensor brings to the table in that regard. I do also love the looks of an all black camera (see attached :-).

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!