Considering a Monochrom Body - Looking for advice

[mpauliks]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 9 Minuten schrieb Olaf_ZG:

Push your SL3s upto 25k… 

Here you go! Source Photons to Photos. Now you please...lol...

 

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!

Edited October 14 by mpauliks

[Advertisement]

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

[Olaf_ZG]

3 minutes ago, mpauliks said:

For Dynamic Range over ISO I posted already to look at the lab results. DR is regardless of daylight or lowlight btw! The Adams zone system is relevant for daylight too! E.g. 246 has serious problems to cover all zones. Anyway, what I demonstrated that the "flatness" of the different Leica monochrom cams is different. You see it, right?

You lost me here. I am a people photographer. So emotion first.

The zone system has ten zones. How many DR is this? I honestly don’t know. I guess that when I print a normal print (not fine art), the DR is around 12, so do I really, but really, need more?

I do agree with you that the original monochrom was more bold then the m10m I had. But the latter saw better in the dark, yet I prefer the first. Complicsted.

[BWColor]

5 minutes ago, Olaf_ZG said:

I agree with @250swb. There are many flat images, but not only in the m11m threads. In any monochrom thread. But then, I recently went through the main street photography thread. The first 50 pages were really great, after that, it were images of people looking at there phones. Flat, boring.

The files of the monochrom need in most case some adjustments. The “negative” shows greys, you need to add some life to it. My opinion though.

Processing, at least curves (in the old days, selecting your photopaper and filter while printing) and dodging/burning, has always been part of the game. Whatever price of the camera, this remains.

Agreed…. If anything, monochrome requires more care in exposure and post.  Of course, this depends on subject and lighting.  For me, I choose subjects differently than with a color camera.  I look for higher contrast scenes, or in some cases scenes with subtle tonality.  Much of the time I shoot with an APO lens, so the detail and micro contrast add to the image.

[fotografr]

35 minutes ago, 250swb said:

But you do list the cameras you do own, and if that isn't relevant to your elitist attitude and your 'experienced' understanding of photography you have a gear related problem and not a photography problem. Owning cameras and knowing what they can do does not make you an experienced photographer, it just means you own cameras.

I listed the cameras because that was precisely what this thread was addressing. If one hasn't used the cameras they're offering opinions about,  it's rather difficult to view their remarks as credible. 

Perhaps you need to grab a dictionary and look up the word, "experienced." I've got more than 40 years working as a professional photographer and I believe that entitles me to use the word. I did not, as you suggest, make it that long in the business by simply owning cameras. 

If you have feelings of inadequacy, perhaps you should deal with them privately rather than tossing insults around on this forum. 

[mpauliks]

vor 5 Minuten schrieb Olaf_ZG:

Complicsted.

Yes. It is. Anyway, I love my 246 still today, but only for haptics as it is an M. A powerful one. But like said before I would never ever buy a monochrom M again when there is something like M11 on the market. M11M is still a dream as you win 1 EV in DR but that´s it. Also myself thinks that 60 MP is nonsense. But this is me for my stuff.

When I picked my 246 there was not a comparable M in color available. But this is some years ago!

 

 

Edited October 14 by mpauliks

[Olaf_ZG]

5 minutes ago, mpauliks said:

Here you go! Source Photons to Photos. Now you please...lol...

 

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!

It’s graph. They are patient.

Let’s do a test: take a portrait of your beloved one. Take it in the dark, no flash, may be some light from a bulb. Settings 1/125, f4-8. Push up the iso. Then ask her/him, to tell you what she/he thinks.

The artifacts visible on their face will them most probably dislike the image, whereas a monochrom might pass.

Maybe not good enough for landscape, but my use case is people/events.

you seem to disagree. Fine with me. That’s why we are discussing. But real life aint a graph.

[fotografr]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 minutes ago, BWColor said:

Agreed…. If anything, monochrome requires more care in exposure and post.  Of course, this depends on subject and lighting.  For me, I choose subjects differently than with a color camera.  I look for higher contrast scenes, or in some cases scenes with subtle tonality.  Much of the time I shoot with an APO lens, so the detail and micro contrast add to the image.

One of the advantages of using a camera with a dedicated b&w sensor is that colour filters, specifically yellow and orange, can address the flatness issue. It also is less of a problem now since Adobe has adjusted the tone curve in the Camera Raw converter to increase contrast. 

[mpauliks]

vor 3 Minuten schrieb Olaf_ZG:

 

Let’s do a test: take a portrait of your beloved one. Take it in the dark, no flash, may be some light from a bulb.

Read a bit more about SL3-S or SL2-S. Both are the most capable Leicas for low light  Labtests confirm this  

For fun here: 

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!

 

[250swb]

4 minutes ago, BWColor said:

 

So, if folks are just shooting without modifying metering and without making adjustments in post, then I can see where files will be flat, but why would someone post those images?  That is why I think that I might not be recognizing the flat/boring that your are commenting on.

I think the ratio of ‘I like out of camera images and don’t do any post processing’ far, far outweighs the number of photographers who can see where the camera doesn’t offer all the answers. You’ve also got the ‘I don’t have time’ excuse, but they’ve bought a £9000 camera and expect people to look at their pictures as if that justifies it. They can have the best camera in the world, but it shouldn’t allow anybody to talk down to people and tell them they are wrong, photography is a creative experience.

[Olaf_ZG]

5 minutes ago, mpauliks said:

Read a bit more about SL3-S or SL2-S. Both are the most capable Leicas for low light  Labtests confirm this  

For fun here: 

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!

 

Had the SL2s. It didn’t match the m10m.

Dont get me wrong, those cameras are great. But they are not a monochrom. You seem to be convinced with the SL series. Good.

In dark environments I wouldn’t use them without fill, whereas a monochrom I could use. But I guess this will be a never ending discussion where I see the value of a monochrom and you don’t, so let’s stop here. We disagree.

[mpauliks]

vor 9 Minuten schrieb 250swb:

‘I like out of camera images and don’t do any post processing’

I would say, we can conclude: If this is wanted (no post processing), a monochrome cam is not the way to go!

[mpauliks]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb Olaf_ZG:

Had the SL2s. It didn’t match the m10m.

Dont get me wrong, those cameras are great. But they are not a monochrom. You seem to be convinced with the SL series. Good.

In dark environments I wouldn’t use them without fill, whereas a monochrom I could use. But I guess this will be a never ending discussion where I see the value of a monochrom and you don’t, so let’s stop here. We disagree.

Olaf, i have both: 246 and up-to-date SL. The only difference for me is in haptics. Image wise I can achieve everything from an SL image, that I can do with 246. Period.

[BWColor]

12 minutes ago, 250swb said:

I think the ratio of ‘I like out of camera images and don’t do any post processing’ far, far outweighs the number of photographers who can see where the camera doesn’t offer all the answers. You’ve also got the ‘I don’t have time’ excuse, but they’ve bought a £9000 camera and expect people to look at their pictures as if that justifies it. They can have the best camera in the world, but it shouldn’t allow anybody to talk down to people and tell them they are wrong, photography is a creative experience.

Ah, agreed, that doesn’t make much sense.  Also, people should produce images that appeals to themselves.  If flat images are what they like, then no problem here, but like you said, “it shouldn’t allow anybody to talk down to people and tell them they are wrong, photography is a creative experience.” 100%!

[IkarusJohn]

2 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

Sorry, mm is the - at least I thought - common shortcut for the original monochrom, the m9m

Maybe. Never seen it before. Simpler approach could be just to use M9M.  When it was released it was just Monochrom (Henri), then we had the confusion with M(240), (246), (262), M-P, then 10-M and M11-M.

I don’t think it matters what you call it, really; provided people know what you’re talking about.  The naming of the EVF M, if there is one, is sure to introduce more confusion.

I use my Monochrom a lot, and do no B&W conversions from my M10-D, SL or my X2D.  I wouldn’t say I belong to a club, but I may be a dilettante, I’m not sure.  Maybe I should ask someone.  What I do know is that the files I get are flat, allowing for gentle adjustment in post, and the mid-tones and transitions are lovely - there’s probably a fancy word for all that.  I like the output, and I use it a lot.  Is that okay?

[Jeff S]

Leica officially introduced it as the M Monochrom and many here, beginning in 2012, started using the MM shortcut, especially when there were no other versions. Later, after additional Monochroms were released (including Q versions), it became common to extend the shortcut to M9M.  Of course, the forum has been known to adopt many  shortcuts like “lux” (Summilux, Noctilux, Digilux?), etc.  Neither Leica nor forum members have been especially clear or consistent with naming.  But I think most have come to understand GAS.

[tegel]

On 10/13/2025 at 10:27 AM, mpauliks said:

Take a look on the lab results. When comparing M11 to M11M the monochrom seems to win by ca. 1 EV for Dynamic Range. Which is important for low light. Check out e.g. https://www.photonstophotos.net/

I’m not exactly sure where to find the “lab results”. Can you provide a link?  I have used the P2P site. In my original post, I included two charts. For DR, the Zf looks to lag behind only the M10m and M11m as far as the monochrom cameras I was considering. The Shadow Improvement chart also seems like it would be a good comparison for B&W images and here the Zf lags behind only the M10m. I’m not sure how meaningful these charts are, but without owning all of these cameras, it seems to be a reasonable means of comparison. 

I did purchase an M10m partly due to these charts. The M11m was quite a bit more than I was willing to spend, and the other monochrom cameras didn’t seem to offer any advantage over the Zf (according to the charts anyway). I’m in the process of deciding if the M10m provides me with a significant advantage over my Zf for B&W. From the discussions here, I probably need to use both more in extreme high ISO situations. 

On 10/13/2025 at 10:27 AM, mpauliks said:

Also I recommend (again) to read the links from Cobalt about emulating the monochrom Leicas: https://www.cobalt-image.com/shop/digital-emulation-adobe/?v=5f02f0889301

Thanks for the reminder. I have not tried these yet. They do look very interesting. 

[tegel]

On 10/13/2025 at 11:13 AM, 250swb said:

Well if there's a way to make things complicated you've nailed it.

On the contrary, using an in-camera B7W profile actually simplifies things for me.  When capturing the image, I see what the profile will create (flat, high contrast, filter effect, etc...). When I bring it into LR, I do not need to convert to B&W and for exiting, I'm limited to the Tone sliders and Tone Curve. Of course, I can make it more complicated by using the Adobe Monochrome setting if desired.

On 10/13/2025 at 11:13 AM, 250swb said:

There's a lot of better software available to convert a colour file to B&W than camera firmware or ACR. I use Nik Collection Silver Efex, and all you do is open your colour image into the Lightroom or Photoshop plugin Silver Efex.

I'm very familiar with the Nik tools (having used it since even before Google purchased it). I haven't updated in a while (I have V3) as I can usually get my desired results using LR. One thing I never liked about using Nik was the inability to go back and continue editing after bringing it back into LR. Maybe this has changed in the newer version?  I know this a can be done with PS, but I prefer staying in LR if possible. Keeps things simple.

 

On 10/13/2025 at 11:13 AM, 250swb said:

You don't need see the image in the camera in B&W using a dedicated camera or a menu setting, a far more powerful tool is to use the imagination, something photographers have used since the dawn of photography when making B&W photographs.

I appreciate the sentiment, but I prefer the WYSIWYG aspect of having the B&W image appear in the viewfinder.  

[ramarren]

This conversation has gone from one thing to another. 

I don't see a monochrome camera as creating 'constraints'. I mostly want to produce monochrome images and a monochrome camera eliminates a number of distractions to that goal. If that is similar to your thinking, then a monochrome camera makes sense for you. If you consider that you only occasionally want to produce a monochrome image, then converting the output from an RGB camera makes more sense, and otherwise enjoying the color it produces. 

Using a Leica M monochrome camera is much like loading your film camera with B&W film ... except you don't get to choose different B&W films with different spectral characteristics and tonal gradients. You have three tools instead: ISO setting, on-lens filters to modify the spectral separation, and image processing to adjust and manipulate tonalities between different colored things in a scene. 

The first thing anyone who buys *any* monochrom camera should do is run tests in order to understand the spectral characteristics of its sensor. I've done this for my M10 Monochrom, and these two charts delineate the differences between an Xrite Color Checker reference color chart exposed without filtration and then exposed through red, orange, yellow, green, and blue B&W filters: 

grayscale swatches

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!

charts and graphs: 

 

Seems a lot of work, but really it's just ten minutes spent with a color checker, consistent lighting, and a few exposures to compare. 

Having done that, I went out shooting my usual subjects, making one exposure with no filter, one exposure with a green filter, and one exposure with an orange filter (my usual choices for B&W film photography). What I found was what I typically find for B&W film: the orange filter tends to increase apparent contrast and reduce dynamic range, the green filter tends to delineate more tonal separations while expanding apparent dynamic range. Yellow, red, and blue filters do similar transforms albeit between slightly different parts of the spectrum; orange and green work more usefully for my photography. 

After examining a lot of photos made with both green and orange filters, I've found that the 90th percent of my photography works best with a green filter. And here's one place where the added sensitivity of the Monochrom comes in handy: a light to deep green B&W filter normally cuts ISO by 1.5-2.5 EV (ISO 100 goes to ISO 40 to ISO 20 essentially), so using a filter on a Monochrom allows you to step up the ISO setting an appropriate amount with little to no degradation in dynamic range or increase in noise. (With the M10 Monochrom and no filter, I can set ISO 50,000 and get nice, clean imaging that looks like ISO 400 B&W out of my film cameras.)

The green filter nails the spectral range that I want, and gives the tonal qualities I want .. which reduces the amount of editing adjustment needed in most cases to almost nothing, presuming I get the exposure right. I set my camera to record only DNG raw files, no JPEGs. In the vast majority of cases, I can roll the DNGs into Lightroom Classic and output them with no modification whatever to finished JPEG files for posting/distribution. BUT I have all the editing capability that having raw files allows, unlike capturing to JPEGs, just in case I want to do something different. (I have tested switching the M10-M to JPEG output only and find that with the green filter, I could indeed just leave it that way most of the time...)

So, rather than limitation and constraint, I pick up the Monochrom and just go shooting, knowing precisely what it will produce for me. I've been shooting B&W photographs for 60+ years, I know what I want, and the camera produces it right on target. Would the same be true for other Leica M monochrome cameras? or the Q monochrome cameras? Yes: I've advised four people I know with Q2M cameras to try using a green filter and each of them has come back to me raving about how excellent and effortless the results are. 

In the end, picking which M monochrome you want is more a question of how much money you want to spend, which body's features suit you best, not so much what the output looks like. To me, for a B&W camera the end result is much more what you do to get the right exposure with the right filtration, and subsequently how you process the "difficult" shots. All the M monochrome cameras can do an excellent job, as can the Q2M. 

But shooting B&W photographs is not the same as shooting color photos no matter what you do. You're transforming the color world into an abstraction by removing the color differentiation, and you have to understand (and want) to do that abstraction; it required intent and thought, and some work when making the exposure. Getting excellent B&W is not a matter of buying the right camera, it's a matter of understanding what to do with it to get what you want in your photos. No camera does that automatically in toto, and B&W does it less than color.

Comparing what you can get with a B&W camera vs a color camera and monochrome rendering is mostly beside the point ... it's a matter of accepting the limitations and advantages of either, and putting the work required into a different part (with different tools) of the photograph making process. 

G

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[250swb]

4 hours ago, tegel said:

I appreciate the sentiment, but I prefer the WYSIWYG aspect of having the B&W image appear in the viewfinder.  

As in maybe 'the monochrome camera helps me see in B&W'? But looking through the viewfinder you see the world in full colour, don't you? But isn't that how photographers have seen the world for decades before digital photography, they've seen the world in colour and used their knowledge and experience to 'unsee' it and turn it into B&W in their minds eye. I can't help you, if you can't look at the world and imagine what you want from your photograph without the aid of a digital monochrome camera how do you imagine anything else?

[tegel]

5 hours ago, 250swb said:

As in maybe 'the monochrome camera helps me see in B&W'? But looking through the viewfinder you see the world in full colour, don't you? But isn't that how photographers have seen the world for decades before digital photography, they've seen the world in colour and used their knowledge and experience to 'unsee' it and turn it into B&W in their minds eye. I can't help you, if you can't look at the world and imagine what you want from your photograph without the aid of a digital monochrome camera how do you imagine anything else?

As time moves on things progress. Just because it was done that way for decades, it doesn’t necessarily mean it is the best/correct/only way. If the technology if today was available then, who’s to say they would have not utilized it to achieve their vision?