M43 Monochrom?

[dkreindler]

This isn't another "why can't camera maker X produce a Monochrom camera?". I have worked for major auto makers in product development, and I love cars. With that said, I know that those enthusiast specials are the hardest to bring to life, because the ROI is often poor (lack of scale, enthusiasts often don't buy new, a whole other laundry list of reasons).

For a company like Leica, creating a small-run Monochrom camera and charging nearly $7k is feasible, much like how Porsche can sell you a 911 GT3 RS without A/C, a stereo or proper door handles on the inside, for nearly 2x the cost of a basic 911 C2. Oly, Panasonic et al would never be able to do this.

Would it be possible to modify an off-the-shelf M43 camera to "see" luminance values like the MM, and do so cost effectively? Or is this just a fool's errand? I have an M2 and a 35mm Summaron 2.8 (no goggles). I'd love an MM to match, but I can't bring myself to spend $7k USD on a digital camera, let alone one with sensor issues.

 

[JamesD172]

Can't you just shoot in monochrome jpeg?

 

[comment23]

This isn't another "why can't camera maker X produce a Monochrom camera?". I have worked for major auto makers in product development, and I love cars. With that said, I know that those enthusiast specials are the hardest to bring to life, because the ROI is often poor (lack of scale, enthusiasts often don't buy new, a whole other laundry list of reasons).

For a company like Leica, creating a small-run Monochrom camera and charging nearly $7k is feasible, much like how Porsche can sell you a 911 GT3 RS without A/C, a stereo or proper door handles on the inside, for nearly 2x the cost of a basic 911 C2. Oly, Panasonic et al would never be able to do this.

Would it be possible to modify an off-the-shelf M43 camera to "see" luminance values like the MM, and do so cost effectively? Or is this just a fool's errand? I have an M2 and a 35mm Summaron 2.8 (no goggles). I'd love an MM to match, but I can't bring myself to spend $7k USD on a digital camera, let alone one with sensor issues.

I'm not sure if I've misunderstood what you want the camera to do but if you want to see things in monochrome as you compose just set the picture mode to monochrome and the EVF and/or rear screen will show a monochrome image. Works in both RAW and jpg (with RAW you will still have the option of a colour output at a later date).

 

[SVQuant]

Would it be possible to modify an off-the-shelf M43 camera to "see" luminance values like the MM, and do so cost effectively? Or is this just a fool's errand? I have an M2 and a 35mm Summaron 2.8 (no goggles). I'd love an MM to match, but I can't bring myself to spend $7k USD on a digital camera, let alone one with sensor issues.

Take a look at Monochrome conversion

There are/were a couple of people offering Monochrome conversions by scraping off the Bayer layer on the sensor. You should find the links in that thread.

 

[GBarrington]

I guess I've never really understood what the point of a monochrome only camera was. I'm not saying it shouldn't be done, just that I can't imagine what the benefit would be over a more conventional digital camera. I don't see the upside other than saving the trivial time it takes to set the jpg to mono, or desaturating an image.

 

[pellicle]

I guess I've never really understood what the point of a monochrome only camera was.

* Extended dynamic range
* Much higher ISO
* Better resolution


Old camera, but shows the potentials

Kodak 760m Review - Luminous Landscape

 

[JamesD172]

* Extended dynamic range
* Much higher ISO
* Better resolution


Old camera, but shows the potentials

Kodak 760m Review - Luminous Landscape

While a monochrome-designed camera in general may offer those features, I don't believe a converted camera will.

Resolution should not increase because the camera software still treats all pixels the same as before. Unless you change the software, a 16MP will stay 16MP. I don't see how dynamic range or noise would be different, either. The same amount of light is hitting the sensor whether or not it's reading color data, so I would imagine that a converted camera would have the same noise performance as if the RAW images were just converted.

Then again I'm no expert. Mostly just speculating.

 

[Deleted member 20897]

While I admit that I am a sucker for a good niche camera or feature, I don't see the world testing enough for a monochrome only camera that more than maybe one or 2 makers would make one.

Having said that, I do love the monochrome feature available on the PEN-F, and use it with regularly. Even with that said, I do not need the days when I shoot film and was stick with the roll in the camera or the ISO. I much prefer the latitude that digital give me and the plethora of post processing options I have available to me. I dare say that this is probably the predominant thought of the market as well. Given the tight margins we now have and the state of the market, most companies would not be able to absorb the cost of a special camera like that.

 

[TNcasual]

We had this discussion before. I think we came to the conclusion that if the sensor was built to be monochrome then there is an advantage. Converted sensors just aren't any better than PP to monochrome.

And this would be such a specialized market that there is no financial reason for Oly or Panasonic to make such a camera.

The current best solution is a Pen F with its in camera JPEG options shot in jpeg + Raw.

 

[pellicle]

While a monochrome-designed camera in general may offer those features, I don't believe a converted camera will.

Agreed, but as you can see I was answering about monochrome cameras advantages, not the question of "what happens if I hack my camera"

I think there is ample evidence in the advantages of sharpness in non bayer systems. So that alone makes a difference. That each pixel suffers on cameras id evidenced by just splitting red and blue and green and seeing what a mess the other filtered channels look like...

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[pdk42]

Short of a Leica M, about the best you can do is to buy a Sigma Fovean camera, especially the new Quatro variants. Personally, I think mono conversions off Bayer sensors are good enough, but I can see why some would want more of a purist solution.

 

[NoSeconds]

Can't you just shoot in monochrome jpeg?

No.... way.....

 

[Machi]

* Extended dynamic range
* Much higher ISO
* Better resolution

Higher ISO (or more precisely much higher sensitivity) and better resolution.
Dynamic range is the same as it's matter of sensor which isn't affected by color (Bayer) filter.

While a monochrome-designed camera in general may offer those features, I don't believe a converted camera will.

Resolution should not increase because the camera software still treats all pixels the same as before. Unless you change the software, a 16MP will stay 16MP.

That's true for JPEGs from the camera but if you work with RAWs from monochrome camera, you can treat them directly as the image as you don't need so called deBayer process (extracting of color image from the monochrome RAW input image).

I don't see how dynamic range or noise would be different, either. The same amount of light is hitting the sensor whether or not it's reading color data, so I would imagine that a converted camera would have the same noise performance as if the RAW images were just converted.

Dynamic range is the same as in unconverted camera but because monochrome camera lacks Bayer and IR-blocking filter, every pixel has much more light available for it. It means that much lower exposures are necessary.
For example night shot which needs 20 seconds in case of color camera,
then needs only 5 seconds in monochrome camera for the same level of noise.

 

[pdk42]

Short of a Leica M, about the best you can do is to buy a Sigma Fovean camera, especially the new Quatro variants. Personally, I think mono conversions off Bayer sensors are good enough, but I can see why some would want more of a purist solution.

Sorry for replying to my own post... but talking of Sigma Fovean cameras, I've long thought that a Sigma Fovean u43 camera would be a really nice thing to have. I think there be a market - probably bigger than the fixed lens or Sigma-mount cameras they have made to date. Imagine having the option of a camera for good light conditions that would deliver 40Mp equivalent images.

 

[David A]

When the Leica Monochrom was originally released I was really interested by the concept of a monochrome camera but the more I looked at the idea the less I came to like it. In the end I decided I didn't want one because I came to realise that the Bayer filter delivered 2 big advantages that I appreciated.

The first was the fact that having the 3 colour channels gave you some leeway for recovering clipped highlights. With a monochrome sensor, if a pixel clips it's clipped and recovery is not possible. You really have to avoid blowing highlights that you want to keep detail in (OK, you need to do that with a sensor with a Bayer filter also) but with the colour channels you can recover some highlight detail if all 3 channels don't clip. There's a little bit of extra leeway/headroom in the highlights which can be useful.

The second advantage is that if you want to change the tonal rendition with a monochrome camera you have to use the same colour filters you used to do back in the old black and white days. With a sensor with a Bayer filter you can adjust the luminance of individual colours in post processing, effectively doing the same thing you would do using filters and a monochrome sensor, but with a lot more flexibility.

For me those advantages outweighed the advantages of a purely monochrome sensor.

The Fovean sensor is different to sensors with a Bayer filter and in theory it should be better for monochrome conversion but it may not be that simple. The sensor is only part of a camera and the rest of the camera counts also. Gregory Simpson of the UltraSomething Photography blog tried using a Sigma camera for monochrome work and wrote a series of 3 articles on his experience which you may find interesting:

Sigma vs. Nerd (Part 1: Sensor School) :: ULTRAsomething

Sigma vs. Nerd (Part 2: The BW Merrill) :: ULTRAsomething

Sigma vs. Nerd (Part 3: The DP3) :: ULTRAsomething