How did you end up with a Monochom?

Rob-F said:
You mean this thread?

https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129905

(Also has some comments about the M8.2.)

Or did you mean this one:
https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=139399

Could you say more about everything being different with the MM?
Click to expand...

Yes, the second thread Rob. I think somewhere there I mention discovering in my Lightroom files some sharp wonderful black and white which I am sure must have been with the Monochrom but it was the M9. That's why I say you don't need it.

But as to your other question, my Monochrom is such a sweet camera. The shutter is smoother and quieter than the M9-P, the shutter button travel and release is second only to my M2. The device itself is such a pleasure to use. And is this all those early Monochroms, or have I scored a particularly good one? Hard to say.

And knowing what it can do alters how I look at things and what I expect in the final result, not just that I only see black and white, like being out with Tri-X where a lovely red letter box is of no interest at all. It's more than that: it's knowing that like with the Hasselblad, I may get some really arresting mid tones that will make the image worthwhile. I obviously don't subscribe to the idea that a camera is just a tool. Sure I can make lousy pictures with anything and I've shot some great pictures with the iPhone, but a camera you really bond with does make a difference. Here’s a picture take in Paris. "The city of light" is so evident in this shot.




U28906I1447482590.SEQ.0.jpg
 
It is a great shot, Richard! I may very well get the Monochrom. It's not a destination, it's a journey!
 
A little over 2 years ago I knocked the aligment of my M240 out of whack and had to send it in for adjustment. This was at the height of the m9 sensor replacement so the turn around on my m240 was 3-4 months. While perusing around the internet I found someone selling MM for dirt cheap as it had 2 small scratches on the sensor, I picked it up cheap knowing I'd spend hours in photoshop repairing each photo (it also had minor rot), but also knowing that as soon as M240 was back, it would be sent out for a new sensor too. I oddly enough enjoyed it more then M240.

Early this year i traded in the M240 and sold the MM to fund an M246.
 
I had imagined that the claimed higher resolution of the Monochrom was due to there being no need for four color receptors in each pixel, so all four could then be separate pixel sites. But no, the MM is still the same 18MP as the M9. So, of what use are those color receptors in a Monochrom? Are three of them just not used? Or they all just function as one? In fact, is it even the same sensor as on the M9? I guess it has to be modified somewhat to remove the color filters.
 
THose color receptors and the bayer filter eat 2-3 stops of light. So when you use a Monochrom, you can use it lower light conditions then you can the comparable color M

https://www.red.com/red-101/color-monochrome-camera-sensors

Rob-F said:
I had imagined that the claimed higher resolution of the Monochrom was due to there being no need for four color receptors in each pixel, so all four could then be separate pixel sites. But no, the MM is still the same 18MP as the M9. So, of what use are those color receptors in a Monochrom? Are three of them just not used? Or they all just function as one? In fact, is it even the same sensor as on the M9? I guess it has to be modified somewhat to remove the color filters.
Click to expand...
 
filmtwit said:
THose color receptors and the bayer filter eat 2-3 stops of light. So when you use a Monochrom, you can use it lower light conditions then you can the comparable color M

https://www.red.com/red-101/color-monochrome-camera-sensors
Click to expand...

So that explains the improved low-light performance. No light is absorbed by filters over the receptors. Now, what explains the improved resolution? In a color sensor, it takes four receptors to make one pixel: two green, one red, one blue. Receptors that were formerly tied up with sensing colors, you might think are now freed up, in the MM, do duty as additional pixel sites instead. So now (you would think) instead of 18MP, there could be 4 X 18, or 72 MP available. That's assuming it's the same sensor as in the M9, and the engine can access those (formerly) RGB sites as discrete pixels instead.

Well, maybe that can't be done. Maybe that's why it is still an 18MP camera. In that case, would it not make sense to make a dedicated black and white sensor that has either: A. A sensor with 18 million sites that are larger than the ones in the M9, probably some four times larger, for even better low light performance--like what Nikon did in the D700, opting for larger pixels sites rather than more of them--or else B, Using that same room on the sensor for four times as many discrete pixel sites.

Or some combination of the two, like twice as many pixels and each receptor is twice the size, for an improvement in both resolution and sensitivity.

So how did the leopard get its spots, or in this case, how does the MM Monochrom get its increased resolution?
 
Rob-F said:
So that explains the improved low-light performance. No light is absorbed by filters over the receptors. Now, what explains the improved resolution? In a color sensor, it takes four receptors to make one pixel: two green, one red, one blue. Receptors that were formerly tied up with sensing colors, you might think are now freed up, in the MM, do duty as additional pixel sites instead. So now (you would think) instead of 18MP, there could be 4 X 18, or 72 MP available. That's assuming it's the same sensor as in the M9, and the engine can access those (formerly) RGB sites as discrete pixels instead.

Well, maybe that can't be done. Maybe that's why it is still an 18MP camera. In that case, would it not make sense to make a dedicated black and white sensor that has either: A. A sensor with 18 million sites that are larger than the ones in the M9, probably some four times larger, for even better low light performance--like what Nikon did in the D700, opting for larger pixels sites rather than more of them--or else B, Using that same room on the sensor for four times as many discrete pixel sites.

Or some combination of the two, like twice as many pixels and each receptor is twice the size, for an improvement in both resolution and sensitivity.

So how did the leopard get its spots, or in this case, how does the MM Monochrom get its increased resolution?
Click to expand...

Lack of interpolation. The real gain in resolution is about one third. That is from my measurements, not theory.

Marty
 
I haven't bought a Monochrom yet, but I feel that day is coming some time or other. The M9 produces great black and white raw conversions, but what I've seen of the M9 Monochrom is a cut above, particularly in higher ISO performance.


A few weeks ago, I tried a secondhand Monochrom that was going pretty cheap. Got the files home and saw that the sensor was riddled with dust and corrosion, so the savings on the camera would be greatly offset by having the sensor replaced.
 
I've owned my Monochrom for almost two years now. I bought it used from KEH with the original sensor. It was a big move for me, I had been working more hours at my job for a while at that point, and I found that the lack of free time I had available, and the workflow of shooting film was keeping me from shooting as much as I wanted. Before that, I was shooting mostly 120 and 4x5 film, doing all of my own developing and printing at home. When the Monochrom arrived, I boxed up all of my darkroom equipment, put it in storage, setup my Epson 1430 with Piezography Carbon inks, ordered a few boxes of Rag Photographique paper, and have been thoroughly enjoying it ever since! The print sharpness, deep blacks, and tonality are pretty outstanding! I do sometimes miss the depth of a glossy fiber based silver gelatin print though, and the hands on process of darkroom printing of course.

I started out with a 50mm Summicron Rigid on it, then sold it and upgraded (or so I thought) to a 50mm Summilux Pre-ASPH E46, then got a 50mm Summicron V5. I then realized that I prefer the rendering of vintage glass on the Monochrom, so I'm now shooting with a 35mm f/3.5 Summaron LTM, a 35mm f/1.5 Canon LTM, and a 50mm f/1.4 Canon LTM.

There's nothing else like the MM1 out there, and that's how I justify owning it still.
 
The MM1: I love the balance between grain at 2500A and smoothness at 320Asa. And the absolute beautiful rendering (I should say, the M240-Monochrom looks good too, slightly different rendering of shadows and mid-tones, pleasing to me) with great grain like Tri-X or FP-4 out of the camera.
Many lenses I use are uncoded (or incorrectly . . ) and the MM1 shows their residual vignetting very nice.

On the M8 I had often converted to B&W. One day I stepped in a Leica Boutique to look for a lens, and there the man showed me a MM1 for a reasonable cost. Couldn't resist. No GAS, just GASP.
 
Richard G said:
If you’re not decided on the Monochrom, and persuaded that your M9 or ME and their clever B and W jpegs or other software will do just fine, then don’t read Gregory Simpson’s extended 3 part review of the Monochrom, starting with Part 3: https://www.leica-camera.blog/2012/11/07/fegor-a-fetishists-guide-to-the-monochrom-part3/
Click to expand...


LOL about the contrast comparison:
MM -->More --> Moronic --> Moriyama

https://www.leica-camera.blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Whats-All-This-About-Contrast.jpg

I had a M9 when the MM was about to be released and Leica offered a Monochrom workshop in NYC, cost to be discounted in case you do decide to buy a MM. Once you see the MM files on the monitor in comparision to bw files of the M9, there is no discussion needed. The next day I called my dealer and he put me on the waiting list. The only Leica item I ever bought new. $8k:bang:

Printed images 20x30 inch on Hahnemuehle FA Brayta printed by Cone Edition using their Piezography inks is everything you ever need to see and to know what the MM is capable of :D.
 
icebear said:
Printed images 20x30 inch on Hahnemuehle FA Brayta printed by Cone Edition using their Piezography inks is everything you ever need to see and to know what the MM is capable of :D.
Click to expand...

No lie. I have seen these big prints.

Really stunning.

"Big prints don't lie," we say.

Cal
 
My wife told me I should buy a digital Leica before we had a child or bought a house. I pointed out that I could do everything I needed with my Nikons and Fujis. She said "Stop justifying not having one, and get one."

Two weeks later, the guy who photographed my wedding put his up for sale. So I bought it. Sold my M3 - no regrets there. I always ran black and white film in my M3 and IIIa, so a Monochrom was a natural choice anyway.

Still have my IIIa, with a 35mm Color Skopar. It's beautiful, but shooting film is hard these days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top