Which monochrom

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Link to HBVCAM

I'd like to add a monochrome camera to my arsenal and am deciding between the Q2M, the M10M and the M11M.

As far as price is concerned I want o avoid depreciation more than I want to avoid spending more. I suspect the M10M wins in this category.

Shooting experience is also important to me and I have read that the M10M has a tasty shutter sound/action. I also read somewhere that the M10M files are more filmic than the M11M files.

The M11M offers benefits because it is lighter, has better exposure and has the same controls as my M11 and uses the same battery.

The Q2M appeals because it has IBIS and AF which means more keepers. 28mm is fine but the other options would mean I get to pair the monochrom with interesting lenses. I think this alone means I should discard the Q2M option.

So it's M10M vs M11M on depreciation, shooting experience, filmic files, chance to share batteries and charger and weight.

Please can owners of both chime in on forecasted depreciation, shooting experience and differences in the DNG files. File size is not relevant to me.

TIA

Truthfully, any of the Monochroms will probably offer you amazing new possibilities. Any of them.

So, for example, if there's a lens you've been hankering for, you could possibly grab an M246 and that lens for the price of an M10M, even more likely for the price of an M11M. 

Depreciation, if we look carefully, is really not that relevant to the larger question; it's certainly not relevant to the picture taking these wonderful cameras make possible. 

I've got the M10M and the M11M. Keeping both wasn't my intention. Rather, it's a credit to the M10M that even after moving to an M11M I've still been unable to come to the decision to sell off the M10M. They're both that special. Honestly, if/when there's an M12M I can't even figure out what I would do with the M11M. I do know that if circumstances dictated that I could keep only one camera, that I'd have to use it for the rest of my life, right now I'm pretty sure it'd be the M11M. But the M10M would qualify for that distinction as well. Again, they're both just that good. 

The business with the battery is actually pretty meaningful, especially in practice. Because I've got an M11, grabbing the M11M is an easy decision. They usually both go with me. 

For more Monochrome USB Camerainformation, please contact us. We will provide professional answers.

But again, the M236 is a near-perfect entry point into the line. Even in terms of depreciation, I guess, its price has arrived at probably close to the low point it will reach. You could try one out for a few months or a year and then pass it on at little loss when the M10M or M11M destined for you appears. The M246 has a few features I missed in the M10M. When you equip the Leica grip you get direct USB download of files (there's a port on the grip), in-camera charging, and also the grip contains a GPS that'll tag location info for shots into your EXIF data: none of this cell sync nonsense to get location data!

Anyway, you can't go far wrong with any of them. If monochrome work is important to you, once you get hold of a Monochrom you'll want never to be without one again. 

Don't overthink it, just get one and be happy! We'll all have different opinions based on our own experiences and preferences.

Deprecation: what time frame are we talking and is this an investment or is this a tool to use?
Shooting Experience: mostly the same, do think the M10M has a nicer shutter sound (and doesn't open when you turn on the camera, unless using liveview), M11M has highlighted metering whereas on M10M you'll likely want to underexpose a bit more to protect highlights
Filmic files: some people don't believe this is a thing on either camera, so very subjective.
Share batteries/charger/weight: yeah that's nice, having the same menu system is nice too.

I have the M11-P and M10M and don't really mind switching between the two, to be fair I did buy my M10M before the M11M was introduced and I didn't think there was enough reason to upgrade. For me my M10M is also not a main camera, but more a fun camera on the side. But if I didn't have an M10M yet I might be swayed by the M11M to have more similar systems - then again, also depends on your budget. 

One thing I do sometimes miss on my M10* cameras is the GPS locations through bluetooth/Fotos app that I have on my M11-P.

I'm going to throw a spanner in the works for you '

I use M10/M10R, M11M & Q2M. For the past few months I've been focusing on B&W interchanging between the M11M & Q2M Cameras.

In terms of the 'tasty' shutter sound, I would agree the 'snick' sounds and feels better than the M11M's shutter action, but believe me, I got over the difference very quickly.
Also the difference in the density the M10's brass top plate vs the M11M alu top plate, the M10 feels slightly more solid in the hand, but the benefits of the lighter M11 make it more pleasant to carry.

I use weighted metering with a -1/3 comp on all cameras, I keep an eye on the histogram for highlights and correct the shadows in post if/as needed.
While I primarily shoot M the Q2 can mimic that experience mainly, but I find I tend to use it more as a P&S and I'm enjoying the freedom to grab quick shots with great success.

With the exception of the original M10, I've bough all my Leica equipment 2nd hand and at very considerable discount to the original sticker price.

Looking at your dilemma, the M11M offers a better battery life then the M10M, same resolution as your M11, same accessories. If B&W is going to be a new passion for you, then sharing your lenses ' even better.

If it's just to scratch the B&W itch, then I'd start with the Q2M @ '3.5k, it will not disappoint, bought keenly, it could part fund a future move to M11M without much further depreciation.

Hint ' B&W is addictive, but does require post processing. An in Camera 'filmic' look is subjective, I prefer to develop my own if I think the image needs it.

Are you interested in learning more about USB Camera Module? Contact us today to secure an expert consultation!

D

Deleted member

Guest

• 15 Apr

• #1

I'm curious. My camera can take photographs in B&W, as probably can all digital cameras. However we all know that the image the camera takes includes all the colours too and only displays in monochrome because you told it to. Move the file to LR, for example, and it is quite straightforward to bring out the colour image. So what is the point of having the ability to shoot in monochrome when I can turn a colour picture into B&W any time I like?

Also, I was looking at true monochrome cameras such as the Leica M11 Monochrome, but they don't seem to offer much advantage over a camera that takes colour and then displays in B&W . I would have expected a high pixel count sensor or extremely low noise at very high ISOs but this doesn't really seem to be the case.

Messages

10,083

Edit My Images

No

• 15 Apr

• #2

So what is the point of having the ability to shoot in monochrome when I can turn a colour picture into B&W any time I like?

My guess: because it looks like an extra feature and costs very little (if anything) to provide.

Also, I was looking at true monochrome cameras such as the Leica M11 Monochrome, but they don't seem to offer much advantage over a camera that takes colour and then displays in B&W.

I consider the digital Leicas to be jewellery that can record images and the mono only Leicas are a particular version for the serious poseur.

It's sad really: I've always thought of the film Leicas, particularly the M3, M2 and M4, as excellent picture making tools. Even a Leica IIIc was a good user, if you could tolerate that pokey viewfinder (easily fixed with an auxilliary finder) and the film loading...

Last edited: 15 Apr

lindsay

Messages

6,404

Name

Lindsay

Edit My Images

Yes

• 15 Apr

• #3

Reading the info about the new Pentax K3-iii Monochrome that is being launched (expected price circa £ I believe), it suggested that the removal of the colour capability in the sensor improved the capture of luminescence of now-B&W only pixels, this reducing noise and getting better sharpness, although it did go on to suggest that the changed pixel performance created a more grainy feel. Not sure I understand any of that, but it did get me interested, at 1/4 the price of the Leica M11 Mono.
I have old Leica iiia and g models, and totally agree about the film loading and viewfinders! Lovely engineering though (although I prefer Contax in general for build and functionality).

Messages

10,083

Edit My Images

No

• 15 Apr

• #5

(although I prefer Contax in general for build and functionality).

Agreed.

Much nicer handling than the screw Leicas and a considerably better viewfinder. Pity they cost so much time and/or money to service that shutter!

lindsay

Messages

6,404

Name

Lindsay

Edit My Images

Yes

• 15 Apr

• #6

Maybe later - I should know that stuff but some areas of physics leave me cold I'm afraid!

Messages

3,196

Name

Andy

Edit My Images

No

• 15 Apr

• #7

I'm curious. My camera can take photographs in B&W, as probably can all digital cameras. However we all know that the image the camera takes includes all the colours too and only displays in monochrome because you told it to. Move the file to LR, for example, and it is quite straightforward to bring out the colour image. So what is the point of having the ability to shoot in monochrome when I can turn a colour picture into B&W any time I like?

Also, I was looking at true monochrome cameras such as the Leica M11 Monochrome, but they don't seem to offer much advantage over a camera that takes colour and then displays in B&W . I would have expected a high pixel count sensor or extremely low noise at very high ISOs but this doesn't really seem to be the case.

The reasons as I see it are:

1) The ability to see the image in black and white before you get home - not everything works in b+w. If using mirrorless, you might be able to see it in the viewfinder when shooting, I'm not sure.

2) not everyone uses raw, so a monochrome jpeg might be fine for some people.

Personally I don't use it as I shoot with the intention of doing my own conversion, but I can see the advantages. From the tests I've read of the Leica Q2 Monochrom, there is more dynamic range and the high iso performance is improved.

SFTPhotography

Ranger Smith

Messages

20,926

Name

Steve

Edit My Images

Yes

• 15 Apr

• #8

Reading the info about the new Pentax K3-iii Monochrome that is being launched (expected price circa £ I believe), it suggested that the removal of the colour capability in the sensor improved the capture of luminescence of now-B&W only pixels, this reducing noise and getting better sharpness, although it did go on to suggest that the changed pixel performance created a more grainy feel. Not sure I understand any of that, but it did get me interested, at 1/4 the price of the Leica M11 Mono.
I have old Leica iiia and g models, and totally agree about the film loading and viewfinders! Lovely engineering though (although I prefer Contax in general for build and functionality).

They just need to make a 45 to 61mp FF K1 mk3 in Mono and colour formats. It's so needed for them it is unreal.

Messages

7,231

Edit My Images

No

• 15 Apr

• #9

I think it is as Andy says above, so that you can see what it looks like in B&W. Some images just don't work.

I often set my Pen F to shoot B&W. It has a few presets which I really enjoy for shots around a city for example. It then gives me a B&W jpeg, but also the raw file if I want to use that. It will also allow me to tweak the curve before I take the shot if I really want to play with it in camera. I haven't used it in ages - I must get it out for a play!

sphexx

Likes a dare

Messages

14,819

Name

Richard

Edit My Images

No

• 15 Apr

• #10

This may seem a gnomic but ' I believe it all centres on the intention.

Messages

8,583

Name

Ian

Edit My Images

No

• 15 Apr

• #11

1) The ability to see the image in black and white before you get home - not everything works in b+w. If using mirrorless, you might be able to see it in the viewfinder when shooting, I'm not sure.

I think it is as Andy says above, so that you can see what it looks like in B&W. Some images just don't work.

Thirded.

Also, shooting in jpeg black & white in your digital camera will remove the colour and you lose the chance to get the colour back (or at least you did with older digi cameras). To those photographers who don't shoot raw or use pp software, it's the only way to go monochrome without post processing.

I've found shooting with a red filter also really helps get a feel for how an image will look in B&W as all my film cameras have colour viewfinders with no black & white mode Red/orange/yellow filters also help with adding a bit of contrast.

Messages

43,027

Name

'Gramps'

Edit My Images

No

• 15 Apr

• #12

I like setting mine to monochrome jpeg + RAW and seeing in mono in the viewfinder, (jpeg), which can give a better indication of light.
The RAW file is saved to use colour, (or more data), if wanted or even re-work to mono. OP D

Deleted member

Guest

Messages

4,823

Name

Pete

Edit My Images

Yes

• 15 Apr

• #14

There are some clever people in this world.

It is amazing what can be achieved with a bit of thinking. I think a lot but rarely achieve anything.

Messages

485

Name

Andrew

Edit My Images

Yes

• 15 Apr

• #15

If I set the picture control on my Nikon DSLR to monochrome then that is what comes up on liveview and the review picture. It is also what comes up in Nikon's raw processing software as a default, although of course I can change it.

I think that in order to get a realistic picture you effectively need the same sensors as a standard camera. You could do it with a single sensor only if it mimicked the sensitivity of our eyes. You would also get lots of white balance issues with a single sensor.

What would be nice is if I could also get a bigger variety of filters for monochrome picture controls (to match the full spectrum of colours and an intensity function for the strength of the filter). OP D

Deleted member

Guest

• 15 Apr

• #16

It is amazing what can be achieved with a bit of thinking. I think a lot but rarely achieve anything.

I think about doing this, then I think about doing that, then I think "that seems a lot of effort, let me think about it for a bit", until in the end, I don't do anything.

Messages

3,632

Name

Graham

Edit My Images

No

• 15 Apr

• #17

There are some clever people in this world.

That link to Cambridge Colour doesn't explain the advantages of a black and white sensor, but it does provide the background. Dedicated black and white sensors don't do any of the clever colour stuff described in that article. With a B &W sensor each photo site simply records luminance. This allows them to provide artefact free, cleaner, better tonal gradation images than you can get from converting to B/W from data interpolated/demosaiced from a colour sensor.

A lot of the control over monochrome processing with a colour sensor comes from manipulating the underlying colour, which doesn't exist in files from a monochrome sensor. So processing (on the computer) is restricted to selectively changing luminance (i.e dodging and burning as used to be the case with black and white printing using an enlarger, plus contrast curves). Big changes in tonal relationships based on colour, needs to be done by using colour filters on the camera(again, as was done in the film days).

I've never used a monochrome digital camera, but some people seem to love them because they give results much closer to black and white film. Others 'like the results" but miss the flexibility in processing black and white from a colour file, and go back to using a colour sensor, even if they specialise in B/W images. Last edited: 16 Apr

Messages

13,190

Name

Alf

Edit My Images

Yes

• 15 Apr

• #18

Unless you are using a mono sensor red, yellow, blue and green filters are pointless on digital. Good PP will do what you need. Using a colour sensored camera you should adjust the colour channels in PP to get the tones you need.

Auto or in camera conversion to mono is usually going to get you a boring low contrast mix of greys like auto printing in B&W film. Many will say they have produce a high contrast mono image but a quick look at a the histogram will often show no blCk or white tones and often not close. Last edited: 15 Apr OP D

Deleted member

Guest

• 15 Apr

• #19

On Tuesday I'm going on a solo two-day landscape-hunting and camping trip to North Devon totally devoted to photography and I intend to try quite a few different exercises and one of them will be to have a couple of hours with my camera set to B&W to see if I can get my eye back in to my old B&W film days.

sphexx

Likes a dare

Messages

14,819

Name

Richard

Edit My Images

No

• 15 Apr

• #20

If I set the picture control on my Nikon DSLR to monochrome then that is what comes up on liveview and the review picture. It is also what comes up in Nikon's raw processing software as a default, although of course I can change it.

I think that in order to get a realistic picture you effectively need the same sensors as a standard camera. You could do it with a single sensor only if it mimicked the sensitivity of our eyes. You would also get lots of white balance issues with a single sensor.

What would be nice is if I could also get a bigger variety of filters for monochrome picture controls (to match the full spectrum of colours and an intensity function for the strength of the filter).

I think the only way a camera sensor could mimic what our eyes 'see' is if it were monochrome and thus 'saw' what our eyes 'see' in dim light using cones only.

Once colour is involved it all becomes very artificial (unnatural?) since what we 'observe' with our brain is not what we 'see' with our retina. OP D

Deleted member

Guest

• 15 Apr

• #21

since what we 'observe' with our brain is not what we 'see' with our retina.

I feel a diversion to a discussion of 'self-awareness' and whether or not a tree falling in the woods makes a noise if there is no one there to see/hear it.

sphexx

Likes a dare

Messages

14,819

Name

Richard

Edit My Images

No

• 15 Apr

• #22

On Tuesday I'm going on a solo two-day landscape-hunting and camping trip to North Devon totally devoted to photography and I intend to try quite a few different exercises and one of them will be to have a couple of hours with my camera set to B&W to see if I can get my eye back in to my old B&W film days.

That's more the point at issue. Some people, and we have to believe them since they are describing their personal experience, say that having a colour film ( or digital equivalent) in the camera blocks their ability to see the scene in B&W tones. It's possibly just the way they learned their photography but I don't why it shouldn't be valid and doesn't force anyone else to follow their practise.

sphexx

Likes a dare

Messages

14,819

Name

Richard

Edit My Images

No

• 15 Apr

• #23

I feel a diversion to a discussion of 'self-awareness' and whether or not a tree falling in the woods makes a noise if there is no one there to see/hear it.

Careful! I see signs of 'thinking'

Messages

3,632

Name

Graham

Edit My Images

No

• 15 Apr

• #24

On Tuesday I'm going on a solo two-day landscape-hunting and camping trip to North Devon totally devoted to photography and I intend to try quite a few different exercises and one of them will be to have a couple of hours with my camera set to B&W to see if I can get my eye back in to my old B&W film days.

I find this useful on my iPhone


As well as saving time, by using it to explore different viewpoints before setting up my tripod, unpacking the camera and deciding which lens to put on, it also has a good b/w emulation (scroll down the web site a bit).

I'm not necessarily suggesting you should buy this, but it makes it easy to explore picture ideas (and visualise in B/W), even when you don't have a camera available. I'm sure there are other options available.

Messages

485

Name

Andrew

Edit My Images

Yes

• 15 Apr

• #25

I think the only way a camera sensor could mimic what our eyes 'see' is if it were monochrome and thus 'saw' what our eyes 'see' in dim light using cones only.

Once colour is involved it all becomes very artificial (unnatural?) since what we 'observe' with our brain is not what we 'see' with our retina.

Yes, but if it doesn't look right in terms of what we see in terms of brightness then it will look very wrong. Imagine a black and white camera where anything towards the red end of the spectrum was ignored; or something that didn't peak in the green range so all the trees look dull. It would be rubbish and look wrong. Similarly something that couldn't adjust the white balance like we do naturally would be unrealistic.

You could make a single colour sensor that gets around those problems, but it would be a lot of effort for not much gain over the really well developed existing sensors.

Here is something to try if you have a mirrorless camera with an electronic viewfinder. Select a monochrome picture control and see if it goes black and white. I expect it does. OP D

Deleted member

Guest

• 15 Apr

• #26

I find this useful on my iPhone


As well as saving time, by using it to explore different viewpoints before setting up my tripod, unpacking the camera and deciding which lens to put on, it also has a good b/w emulation (scroll down the web site a bit).

I'm not necessarily suggesting you should buy this, but it makes it easy to explore picture ideas (and visualise in B/W), even when you don't have a camera available. I'm sure there are other options available.

Looks useful, unfortunately I have an Android , although Magic Viewfinder seems to do similar things, I'll check it out.

sphexx

Likes a dare

Messages

14,819

Name

Richard

Edit My Images

No

• 15 Apr

• #27

Yes, but if it doesn't look right in terms of what we see in terms of brightness then it will look very wrong. Imagine a black and white camera where anything towards the red end of the spectrum was ignored; or something that didn't peak in the green range so all the trees look dull. It would be rubbish and look wrong. Similarly something that couldn't adjust the white balance like we do naturally would be unrealistic.

You could make a single colour sensor that gets around those problems, but it would be a lot of effort for not much gain over the really well developed existing sensors.

Here is something to try if you have a mirrorless camera with an electronic viewfinder. Select a monochrome picture control and see if it goes black and white. I expect it does.

I suspect, but can't prove, that the reason monochrome photos were so widely accepted so quickly and for so long was because people were unconsciously experienced at seeing in mono.

I'm not argue about any colour aspects of photography/cameras as I'm red-green colour blind which may also be a factor in my generally preferring mono!

lindsay

Messages

6,404

Name

Lindsay

Edit My Images

Yes

• 15 Apr

• #28

This is what is intriguing me and stoking my GAS: Pentax K3 iii Mono
I have no need for it etc, but love the idea of it and have always been a Pentax fan (in film at any rate)

Messages

3,632

Name

Graham

Edit My Images

No

• 15 Apr

• #29

This is what is intriguing me and stoking my GAS: Pentax K3 iii Mono
I have no need for it etc, but love the idea of it and have always been a Pentax fan (in film at any rate)

There is a review here (which I haven't yet watched, but I often watch his videos) from someone who has been using it for a few weeks

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQ5LtayQrpo
OP D

Deleted member

Guest

• 15 Apr

• #30

This is what is intriguing me and stoking my GAS: Pentax K3 iii Mono
I have no need for it etc, but love the idea of it and have always been a Pentax fan (in film at any rate)

ISO 200- 1.6million! That's insane.

myotis: Watched the video and that guy takes some lovely images.

The camera looks very chunky but I do like the understated colouring on the monochrome version.

TBH I didn't know Pentax were still in business, never mind coming out with new cameras but further investigation shows the name is owned by Ricoh it would seem..

Messages

7,231

Edit My Images

No

• 15 Apr

• #31

Thinking about how we see, and hopefully not too far off topic... I listened to a judge this week who has had two cataract operations. He says they have effectively interfered with his white balance. When the first was done he could see a different white balance with each eye. He has had both done now and they are the same, but plainly different to what he perceived before.

sphexx

Likes a dare

Messages

14,819

Name

Richard

Edit My Images

No

• 15 Apr

• #32

TBH I didn't know Pentax were still in business, never mind coming out with new cameras but further investigation shows the name is owned by Ricoh it would seem..

Ricoh didn't just buy the name (though in a sense Pentax has just been a 'name ' for some time) everything that was Pentax. Ricoh are also going with producing a new Pentax film camera while they still have the expertise etc.

I always get the impression that cameras are a sort of hobby business for Ricoh ' OP D

Deleted member

Guest

• 15 Apr

• #33

Ricoh are also going with producing a new Pentax film camera while they still have the expertise etc.

That must be a very small market these days. OP D

Deleted member

Guest

• 16 Apr

• #34

I find shooting in bnw its much easier to see where the light is, being all tonal values

Messages

8,583

Name

Ian

Edit My Images

No

• 16 Apr

• #35

Off topic (sorry!), but just to add, I wrote a review of Truegrain 2 which is an app that allows you to emulate B&W film with your colour images. It uses the spectral sensitivity of the original film stock(s) as well as allowing you to enter your own settings if you have an obscure film you want to emulate (and still have the data sheet!). All of the B&W conversions I did from digital looked terrible and I could never get anything I liked that resembled black & white film - namely the look of HP5, Tri-X, Double-X and Delta . When I tried this, I was blown away.

Messages

3,632

Name

Graham

Edit My Images

No

• 16 Apr

• #36

ISO 200- 1.6million! That's insane.

myotis: Watched the video and that guy takes some lovely images.

The camera looks very chunky but I do like the understated colouring on the monochrome version.

TBH I didn't know Pentax were still in business, never mind coming out with new cameras but further investigation shows the name is owned by Ricoh it would seem..

I've watched the video now, I just didn't have time until this morning. He is one of the people I follow on Youtube, and he often has interesting things to say as well as interesting pictures. I'm glad to see he confirmed some of the same points I made in my earlier post about monochrome sensors.

Especially the different responses that people show towards monochrome sensors. Some find the nuanced differences absolutely worthwhile and others are more lukewarm. It would be interesting to search out a comparison with the Leica or/and Phase One monochrome sensors. And maybe one day, a Fuji mono, as there is regular noise from some fuji enthusiasts for a mono fuji Xpro 3, maybe that will be his next weeks video

Not that I own one, but Pentax (Ricoh) seem to be a bit of a forgotten gem, including the low cost (relatively speaking) 645z medium format digital.

sphexx

Likes a dare

Messages

14,819

Name

Richard

Edit My Images

No

• 16 Apr

• #37

That must be a very small market these days.

Ricoh has long been a niche camera producer though I think when they bought Pentax they said they did it to become more mainstream which I did ythink was a bit unlikely given the decline of 'real' camera manufacturing.

lindsay

Messages

6,404

Name

Lindsay

Edit My Images

Yes

• 16 Apr

• #38

Ricoh made a decision with Pentax not to try to compete with Nikon/Canon on Mirrorless, but to stick with DSLRs and concentrate on niche product improvements, hence the astro capabilities of the K1-ii and now the Mono K3-iii. As the video guy and Pentax fans have been saying, a B&W version of the GR3 compact using the same B&W APS-C sensor makes sense, and the research into a new film model (it's not a done deal, they are trying to transfer and thus retain the skills of the retiring film guys with a new film camera as the potential project aim). I'd buy the new film camera if it could improve on my LX, which would be really hard to achieve.

Nod

Tootles

Messages

46,975

Name

Nod (UK)

Edit My Images

Yes

• 16 Apr

• #39

On Tuesday I'm going on a solo two-day landscape-hunting and camping trip to North Devon totally devoted to photography and I intend to try quite a few different exercises and one of them will be to have a couple of hours with my camera set to B&W to see if I can get my eye back in to my old B&W film days.

Valley of the Rocks!