Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Sony Alpha / NEX Mirrorless > Sony Alpha Mirrorless - All Models

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

How does Sony A7 (latest) compare with Leica Monochrome?
Old 02-22-2019   #1
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 933
How does Sony A7 (latest) compare with Leica Monochrome?

Hello,

I am wondering if anybody who owned both of the cameras (Leica Monochrome and any of the Sony A7 series) compared the black and white images from both?
Is Leica BW image superior, and if so, is it couple thousands of dollars superior?

My wife suggested a gift for anniversary, plus I got some bonus at work, etc., etc. But I already have Sony A7, original one...

Please note that I am fully aware of functionality, form factor, etc.
That is NOT the comparison that I am looking for, having shot Sony A7 for a long time as well as various Leica cameras.
But never had Monochrome.
I don’t have any brand loyalty either, so it’s the image vs. image comparison that I am looking for.

Thank you in advance.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #2
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,390
Monochrome has big presence on Flickr.
https://www.flickr.com/groups/mmonochrom/pool/
Most of it is dross, but I have one or two Monochrome users to follow and they produce very pleasing BW.
Fabio Lugaro is one of them. Just couple of days ago he posted joyful BW from his Monochrome.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/fabiol...ol-mmonochrom/
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #3
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,559
I have not had either but will convey something I had not realized though I probably should have. However it is not something I have heard spoken of until I was told recently that the Leica Monochrome produces its mono output as RAW (DNG) files. Other digital cameras can produce mono image output but only as JPG. I suppose this accounts for the excellent image detail etc of the Leica's images in this camera. I do not know how it affects dynamic range compared with Sony or other cameras but should have thought there would be some advantage there too at least if relying on in-camera mono processing - though of course if you do what I generally do which is shoot in RAW then convert in post to monochrome (if that is the output I want) then that difference would be minimized or nullified given you are still working with a RAW file to start with not a JPG.

Others will be able to comment on this but I must say that when I heard about mono RAW output from this camera it set me thinking about whether I could justify buying one myself. at least there is a certain liberating film like shooting experience if shooting natively in mono and getting the best possible digital outcomes direct from the camera without needing to go to post processing every time as I do now.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #4
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
Monochrome has big presence on Flickr.
https://www.flickr.com/groups/mmonochrom/pool/
Most of it is dross, but I have one or two Monochrome users to follow and they produce very pleasing BW.
Fabio Lugaro is one of them. Just couple of days ago he posted joyful BW from his Monochrome.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/fabiol...ol-mmonochrom/
Kostja, thanks. I will take a look.
BUT, I know files can be made looking good, from any camera.
Hell, I even know how to do it myself :-)
The answer I am looking for- besides the form factor, are the files, being compared "apples to apples", that much better?
I am not asking to trash Leica, mind you, I am considering getting Monochrome.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #5
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterm1 View Post
I have not had either but will convey something I had not realized though I probably should have. However it is not something I have heard spoken of until I was told recently that the Leica Monochrome produces its mono output as RAW (DNG) files. Other digital cameras can produce mono image output but only as JPG. I suppose this accounts for the excellent image detail etc of the Leica's images in this camera. I do not know how it affects dynamic range compared with Sony or other cameras but should have thought there would be some advantage there too at least if relying on in-camera mono processing - though of course if you do what I generally do which is shoot in RAW then convert in post to monochrome (if that is the output I want) then that difference would be minimized or nullified given you are still working with a RAW file to start with not a JPG.

Others will be able to comment on this but I must say that when I heard about mono RAW output from this camera it set me thinking about whether I could justify buying one myself. at least there is a certain liberating film like shooting experience if shooting natively in mono and getting the best possible digital outcomes direct from the camera without needing to go to post processing every time as I do now.
Don't you enjoy the post-processing though? I would think you do.
I mean I get the rumblings about the need for post process from those who posts straight from camera, But you (and I) are not those.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #6
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwolf View Post
I don't own the Sony, but here's an experience that might be relevant.

When I was selling my Monochrom (CCD), a professional photographer responded to the Craigslist add. We met and he took many pictures with it, alongside those with his A7II and the same Leica lenses.

After a couple days he called to say he was not interested in buying it because he could not see a significant difference in the files between the two cameras.

John
I did some googling and mostly the sentiment is the same
That sucks... I was hoping to get convinced :-)
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #7
furcafe
Registered User
 
furcafe's Avatar
 
furcafe is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Washington, DC, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 4,303
I have the current, M240-based, Monochrom as well as the Sony a9 & an old a7R. I don't do monochrome conversions of color files as I'm not into post-processing, but from what I've seen, there's no real technical reason to get a Monochrom over a Sony, especially if you get an a7RII or a7RIII.
__________________
Five a Second. Chicago's Bell & Howell Co. (cameras) announced that it would put on sale this fall the world's most expensive still camera. Its "Foton" will take five 35-mm. pictures a second, sell for $700. Bell & Howell, which has found that "families of both low and high incomes now spend over $550" for movie equipment, hopes to sell 20,000 Fotons a year.
--Facts And Figures, Time magazine, Monday, October 4, 1948
My Photoblog

My Flickr stream

My RFF Gallery

My Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #8
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by furcafe View Post
I have the current, M240-based, Monochrom as well as the Sony a9 & an old a7R. I don't do monochrome conversions of color files as I'm not into post-processing, but from what I've seen, there's no real technical reason to get a Monochrom over a Sony, especially if you get 1 an a7RII or a7RIII.
OK,
That's exactly what I was looking for.

Alone the same lines, is there a reason to upgrade to latest A7 Sony from the original that I have?
Still images only, not interested in video.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #9
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 10,013
M,

I would agree with you that with skill any camera can do really good B&W. Pretty much it is just about being stubborn, digging in, and making the camera work for you.

You should know that I am a Monochrom owner user, and I do not have experience with an A7. I love my MM warts and all, even though it pretty much today is a rather primitive camera with a crappy LCD, slow buffer, not so great high ISO...

So when it comes to files the CCD sensor on my MM has a unique rendering that is more mid rich than a CMOS that has better shadow detail and smoother rolloff in the highlights with scooped mids.

I suspect that your A7 files would display a histogram more like a M246 because both have CMOS sensors.

You should also know that I print and use Piezography. In my judgement it takes prints larger than 13x19 to really take advantage of the increased tonality and resolution. I print 13.3x20 on 17x24 sheet as my small print size and 20x30 image size on 24x36 sheet.

So really unless you intend to print big (big prints don't lie) where more detail is revealed and tonality opens up to transcend formats, I don't think the files produced by a Monochrom would be exploited.

My prints don't look like small format at all, look like medium format, and at times with a file made under perfect conditions I dare say looks like large format.

The files can be that good if you are. Also know that I tend to shoot like a large format shooter where I maximize everything at time of image capture to minimize post processing as to minimize digital artifact (noise). For example I use yellow filters to get the contrast I want at image capture rather than in post processing where contrast boosting can add noise and digital artifact. Pretty much I need "clean" files that require minimal post.

So the moral of the story is will the files/data be exploited where it matters, like say in a large print?

Also know that Piezography is a match made in heaven with a MM. If I had studio space I could print digital negatives and make silver wet prints via contact printing with the Piezography system I currently own. All I need is $150.00 worth of software and a I1 to fully calibrate my system for profiling. Everything is turnkey at this level.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #10
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,179
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
OK,
That's exactly what I was looking for.

Alone the same lines, is there a reason to upgrade to latest A7 Sony from the original that I have?
Still images only, not interested in video.
I think there are a bunch of improvements in the later cameras. Obviously more resolution, lack of AA filter, IBIS, better/bigger EVF, more dynamic range, better high ISO performance...etc..etc.

If you don't want to spend a lot of time in post try using the Rich Tone Monochrome in the Sony. Works best with a tripod as it combines multiple exposures together to create the file.

Shawn
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #11
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
M,

I would agree with you that with skill any camera can do really good B&W. Pretty much it is just about being stubborn, digging in, and making the camera work for you.

You should know that I am a Monochrom owner user, and I do not have experience with an A7. I love my MM warts and all, even though it pretty much today is a rather primitive camera with a crappy LCD, slow buffer, not so great high ISO...

So when it comes to files the CCD sensor on my MM has a unique rendering that is more mid rich than a CMOS that has better shadow detail and smoother rolloff in the highlights with scooped mids.

I suspect that your A7 files would display a histogram more like a M246 because both have CMOS sensors.

You should also know that I print and use Piezography. In my judgement it takes prints larger than 13x19 to really take advantage of the increased tonality and resolution. I print 13.3x20 on 17x24 sheet as my small print size and 20x30 image size on 24x36 sheet.

So really unless you intend to print big (big prints don't lie) where more detail is revealed and tonality opens up to transcend formats, I don't think the files produced by a Monochrom would be exploited.

My prints don't look like small format at all, look like medium format, and at times with a file made under perfect conditions I dare say looks like large format.

The files can be that good if you are. Also know that I tend to shoot like a large format shooter where I maximize everything at time of image capture to minimize post processing as to minimize digital artifact (noise). For example I use yellow filters to get the contrast I want at image capture rather than in post processing where contrast boosting can add noise and digital artifact. Pretty much I need "clean" files that require minimal post.

So the moral of the story is will the files/data be exploited where it matters, like say in a large print?

Also know that Piezography is a match made in heaven with a MM. If I had studio space I could print digital negatives and make silver wet prints via contact printing with the Piezography system I currently own. All I need is $150.00 worth of software and a I1 to fully calibrate my system for profiling. Everything is turnkey at this level.

Cal
Cal,
Thank you.
I don't print larger than 19x13" (and did not print larger when I did wet printing either). So I cannot really see any advantages for me as it is for you :-)
So what you are saying is making perfect sense, in full accordance with the law of diminishing returns.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #12
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,685
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
OK,
That's exactly what I was looking for.

Alone the same lines, is there a reason to upgrade to latest A7 Sony from the original that I have?
Still images only, not interested in video.
Definitely, the current A7 cameras do not suffer from sensor flares that the original A7 did. This is when you get a multiple series of highlight flares from a scene with bright highlight areas.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58120415
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #13
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 10,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
Cal,
Thank you.
I don't print larger than 19x13" (and did not print larger when I did wet printing either). So I cannot really see any advantages for me as it is for you :-)
So what you are saying is making perfect sense, in full accordance with the law of diminishing returns.
Mikhail,

You nailed it with the diminishing returns concept. It actually takes an vast extraordinary amount of effort to fully exploit the full possibilities.

You also made a good point about how today any camera with skill can make great B&W.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #14
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Definitely, the current A7 cameras do not suffer from sensor flares that the original A7 did. This is when you get a multiple series of highlight flares from a scene with bright highlight areas.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58120415
Hmm, I did not notice much of that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn View Post
I think there are a bunch of improvements in the later cameras. Obviously more resolution, lack of AA filter, IBIS, better/bigger EVF, more dynamic range, better high ISO performance...etc..etc.

If you don't want to spend a lot of time in post try using the Rich Tone Monochrome in the Sony. Works best with a tripod as it combines multiple exposures together to create the file.

Shawn
OK, I can try that.
Thank you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #15
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
Mikhail,

You nailed it with the diminishing returns concept. It actually takes an vast extraordinary amount of effort to fully exploit the full possibilities.

You also made a good point about how today any camera with skill can make great B&W.

Cal
:-)
Like I said, I was hoping to get convinced :-)
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #16
rhl-oregon
Cameras Guitars Wonders
 
rhl-oregon's Avatar
 
rhl-oregon is offline
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 4,135
A7II (and models beyond the original) can use TechArt adapter to autofocus M lenses. If AF capability with M lenses is more compelling to you than manual RF focus on an M, that is a reason to stick with Sony. If you shoot wider than 35mm, a Kolari sensor mod is a sensible investment.

I just acquired a Kolarified A7II. It’s more robustly built than my well-used A7K (which I bought, originally, as a FF digital body for my ZM lenses). The TechArt adapter offers real P&S convenience, at a parade or the fair. I reckon my investment there about $1250.

I also have an M-D, though, and the photographic experience with it is exactly like an M7, like a metered RF film camera. Calmer. More inwardly focused. An optical mechanical instrument with a digital sensor, as opposed to a multi-menued heads-up display with a shutter button. No reason to fidget with menus, displays, no function buttons erupting like the measles; no PASM or exposure compensation-dials getting twisted by gremlins in the bag.

Also: I bought the M-D to celebrate my retirement, which has some parallel to your situation. (Years ago, when I wanted a Monochrome, the A7K was what I could afford.) to know what one truly desires will always inspire. Some occasions are worth the greatest possible gifts.
__________________
Robert Hill Long
Southern Pines, North Carolina USA


http://rhl.photography
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #17
LCSmith
arbiter elegentiae
 
LCSmith's Avatar
 
LCSmith is offline
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
Hello,

I am wondering if anybody who owned both of the cameras (Leica Monochrome and any of the Sony A7 series) compared the black and white images from both?
Is Leica BW image superior, and if so, is it couple thousands of dollars superior?

My wife suggested a gift for anniversary, plus I got some bonus at work, etc., etc. But I already have Sony A7, original one...

Please note that I am fully aware of functionality, form factor, etc.
That is NOT the comparison that I am looking for, having shot Sony A7 for a long time as well as various Leica cameras.
But never had Monochrome.
I don’t have any brand loyalty either, so it’s the image vs. image comparison that I am looking for.

Thank you in advance.
Is this a serious question? I cannot think of two digital cameras which are more different than a Sony Alpha and a Leica Monochrome. The similarities are that they are full-frame and mirrorless. That is about it. I do not mean to be mean-spirited, but seriously, what are you talking about?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #18
markjwyatt
Registered User
 
markjwyatt's Avatar
 
markjwyatt is online now
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Southern California
Posts: 615
Is there any truth to the contention that an 18 MP Monochrom image is better than a converted 18 MP image for RGB sensors? It does make some sense since every single pixel is directly used rather than combined to create a color which is then converted to a shade of grey. The implication is that an 18 MP RGB sensor is somewhere between a 6-18 MP B&W sensor.
__________________
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/markjwyatt/
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #19
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,319
The M Monochrome Type 246 (link) has the best analog dynamic range of any Leica M camera. Still,its DR is very close to the M10's. (link)

The DR is also similar to SONY bodies (link).

The low-light performance is within 1/3 stop of the SONYs'. (link) – zoom the chart to see detail for the 24 X 36mm sensor column.

These data are estimates for un-rendered raw file data. So post-processing rendering parameters do not affect the results.

In-camera JPEGs are rendered from raw data. A raw file's signal-to-noise limits JPEG rendering. However, perceived image quality could depend on the in-camera demosaicking algorithms as well differences in rendering parameters.

"Is Leica BW image superior, and if so, is it couple thousands of dollars superior? "
This is a subjective question. My subjective answer is no – the M Monochrome Type 246 is not worth the ~2 thousand dollar cost increase.

What is worth 2 thousand dollars could be the value-added aspect of using an M rangefinder. The experience of operating a camera with an optical rangefinder and minimalistic controls is worth something. Avoiding lens adapters and the convenience of using coded lenses is another advantage. These also are subjective issues.

While signal-to-noise ratio is not the sole factor that determines the perceived quality of monochrome images, I would prefer a M10 to the Type 246.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #20
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by LCSmith View Post
Is this a serious question? I cannot think of two digital cameras which are more different than a Sony Alpha and a Leica Monochrome. The similarities are that they are full-frame and mirrorless. That is about it. I do not mean to be mean-spirited, but seriously, what are you talking about?
Better question would be: what the hell you talking about? I asked questions and people answered. You have anything to say on subject? If not, then I have something to say to you, will try not to though...
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #21
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
The M Monochrome Type 246 (link) has the best analog dynamic range of any Leica M camera. Still,its DR is very close to the M10's. (link)

The DR is also similar to SONY bodies (link).

The low-light performance is within 1/3 stop of the SONYs'. (link) – zoom the chart to see detail for the 24 X 36mm sensor column.

These data are estimates for un-rendered raw file data. So post-processing rendering parameters do not affect the results.

In-camera JPEGs are rendered from raw data. A raw file's signal-to-noise limits JPEG rendering. However, perceived image quality could depend on the in-camera demosaicking algorithms as well differences in rendering parameters.

"Is Leica BW image superior, and if so, is it couple thousands of dollars superior? "
This is a subjective question. My subjective answer is no – the M Monochrome Type 246 is not worth the ~2 thousand dollar cost increase.

What is worth 2 thousand dollars could be the value-added aspect of using an M rangefinder. The experience of operating a camera with an optical rangefinder and minimalistic controls is worth something. Avoiding lens adapters and the convenience of using coded lenses is another advantage. These also are subjective issues.

While signal-to-noise ratio is not the sole factor that determines the perceived quality of monochrome images, I would prefer a M10 to the Type 246.
I hear you on a subject of "experience of operating a camera". I had all 3 types of Leica - M, IIIf, R. Still have some.
It certainly a different experience but final image for me was always a first priority. Still is :-)
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #22
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 10,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by markjwyatt View Post
Is there any truth to the contention that an 18 MP Monochrom image is better than a converted 18 MP image for RGB sensors? It does make some sense since every single pixel is directly used rather than combined to create a color which is then converted to a shade of grey. The implication is that an 18 MP RGB sensor is somewhere between a 6-18 MP B&W sensor.
Mark,

As a printer, from a printing standpoint, and from experience I can print bigger with a MM file than a M9 file that was converted.

Please understand that I do extraordinary things to maximize image capture and minimize post to create clean files.

One way to extrapolate is that the lack of Bayer Filter Array for RGB makes the 18 MP MM more like a 24 MP sensor in comparing resolution.

The M246 is somewhat compromised as the files are 12-bit instead of 14-bit like in the MM. There is a bit of a trade off between megapixels and bit-depth inwhich the M246 has more MP for enhanced resolution, but the MM has more bit-depth to make up some of the difference in MP count.

No doubt the M-246 is a more advanced camera with better shadow detail, smoother roll off in the highlights, better high ISO, more dynamic range...

No doubt the BFA degrades a B&W as far as resolution.

The question here is the additional noise and digital artifact evident. For me that depends on print size. On prints 13x19 or smaller you really won't see or notice a difference.

On really big prints any noise or digital artifact becomes amplified. Also know that on really big prints things really open up also. The mids sing so that small format transcends formats. Also detail is reveal that is not evident on smaller prints. Prints are less about contrast and more about broad/complete tonality like in larger formats.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #23
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
Mark,


One way to extrapolate is that the lack of Bayer Filter Array for RGB makes the 18 MP MM more like a 24 MP sensor in comparing resolution.


Cal
Well, that's an easy fix :-)
https://petapixel.com/2013/08/04/scr...per-bw-photos/
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #24
LCSmith
arbiter elegentiae
 
LCSmith's Avatar
 
LCSmith is offline
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
Better question would be: what the hell you talking about? I asked questions and people answered. You have anything to say on subject? If not, then I have something to say to you, will try not to though...
Odd that someone confident in his position would become defensive. I have nothing to add. I hope you enjoy whatever decision you make. I have owned digital Leicas (though not the MM) and Sony A7R2. The color from the Sony never seemed right. The color from the Leica was always perfect (I used hodiernal Leica glass). But I do not really enjoy color photography and I have committed my workflow entirely to shooting and processing and printing bw film. I am an amateur who does it for the love. People who have to make a living being a photographer would obviously have very different criteria for gear.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #25
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 10,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
Mikhail,

Thanks for the link.

Too bad this commercially could not be performed.

The remove annoying anti aliasing filters that degrade images.

Also likely firmware might have to be optimized.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #26
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
Kostja, thanks. I will take a look.
BUT, I know files can be made looking good, from any camera.
Hell, I even know how to do it myself :-)
The answer I am looking for- besides the form factor, are the files, being compared "apples to apples", that much better?
I am not asking to trash Leica, mind you, I am considering getting Monochrome.
MIkhail, looks like you need to get raw, dng files from both. To compare by yourself. I understand your situation.

Any Leica bw file needs PP. Starting from M8, if not processed correctly, it gives so-so results.
And with Monochrome I see 99 from 100 to be a failure in PP.

But it is all personal. This is why the only solution I see is to get files from both and try them in PP.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #27
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
Mikhail,

Thanks for the link.

Too bad this commercially could not be performed.

The remove annoying anti aliasing filters that degrade images.

Also likely firmware might have to be optimized.

Cal
I am reading, Sony A7R II does not have one.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #28
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
MIkhail, looks like you need to get raw, dng files from both. To compare by yourself. I understand your situation.

Any Leica bw file needs PP. Starting from M8, if not processed correctly, it gives so-so results.
And with Monochrome I see 99 from 100 to be a failure in PP.

But it is all personal. This is why the only solution I see is to get files from both and try them in PP.
Kostja, actually, if one has to go extra mile to look for a difference, that probably answers my question already :-)
******************************
I think I am getting a picture here.
Thank you everybody.
I certainly don't dismiss the form factor, compactness etc.
But- to me - that's secondary.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #29
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is online now
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,680
They are both 24MP CMOS sensors. Maybe you’ll see a difference based on lenses. I tend to doubt it.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #30
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,685
I’ve never looked at a digital b&w photo and have been able to identify which camera took it. I’ve seen beautiful images from all sorts of devices.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #31
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 10,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
I am reading, Sony A7R II does not have one.
Mikhail,

I pretty much use the Lightroom default of setting of 25 for sharpening.

Any additional sharpening comes from my use of "Clarity."

I don't like anti-alias filters at all. I'd rather have the moray.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

MM Here
Old 02-22-2019   #32
Dektol Dan
Registered User
 
Dektol Dan is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 926
MM Here

I still have my CCD Mono. Post processing and shooting should try emulate the Zone system. Shooting must follow same procedures as film for focus and direction of light and effort to find the best shadow detail without washing out high lights. This a skill that is easily learned with experience with film.

Nothing emulates film grain like the CCD Mono. Nothing.

I just bought an M10 and we'll see how B&W fares with the Mono, but I'm willing to bet that it's apple and oranges.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #33
markjwyatt
Registered User
 
markjwyatt's Avatar
 
markjwyatt is online now
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Southern California
Posts: 615
Interesting discussion. Thanks @MIkhail

I like the B&W I get out of my 24 MP Fujifilm XT-2 (I believe it does not have an AA filter). Good color leads to good B&W, but I suspect going direct would be better. I need to start playing with Fujiflim RAW X Studio, because this uses the Acros engine in the camera, and the Acros engine is designed (as far as I understand) to process noise as Acros grain, which I find interesting. I do shoot straight Acros jpegs sometimes, but with RAW X Studio you get some ability to guide the creation of the jpeg, much like other RAW processors.
__________________
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/markjwyatt/
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #34
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 10,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dektol Dan View Post
I still have my CCD Mono. Post processing and shooting should try emulate the Zone system. Shooting must follow same procedures as film for focus and direction of light and effort to find the best shadow detail without washing out high lights. This a skill that is easily learned with experience with film.

Nothing emulates film grain like the CCD Mono. Nothing.

I just bought an M10 and we'll see how B&W fares with the Mono, but I'm willing to bet that it's apple and oranges.
Dan,

I own a Leica SL. In a way the M10 is a SL except a compact rangfinder.

I would agree with you that the CCD sensor of the MM is better in emulating film grain. It also has its distinct rendering.

My SL with its CMOS sensor does really well for B&W and has its advantages, but there is no replacement for the MM.

I would not say apples and oranges, but I would say you need both. The MM is kinda unreplacable. If you want a digital that is most like a film camera the MM is it.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-28-2019   #35
furcafe
Registered User
 
furcafe's Avatar
 
furcafe is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Washington, DC, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 4,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
OK,
That's exactly what I was looking for.

Alone the same lines, is there a reason to upgrade to latest A7 Sony from the original that I have?
Still images only, not interested in video.

Sorry for responding late, but yes, to follow up on what Huss posted, there are clear tech improvements in each iteration, not just with the sensors but also features & user interface (image stabilization, improved EVF & autofocus, etc.) as well as file handling (IIRC, the 1st generation a7 & a7R didn't offer true lossless compression).
__________________
Five a Second. Chicago's Bell & Howell Co. (cameras) announced that it would put on sale this fall the world's most expensive still camera. Its "Foton" will take five 35-mm. pictures a second, sell for $700. Bell & Howell, which has found that "families of both low and high incomes now spend over $550" for movie equipment, hopes to sell 20,000 Fotons a year.
--Facts And Figures, Time magazine, Monday, October 4, 1948
My Photoblog

My Flickr stream

My RFF Gallery

My Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-01-2019   #36
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by furcafe View Post
Sorry for responding late, but yes, to follow up on what Huss posted, there are clear tech improvements in each iteration, not just with the sensors but also features & user interface (image stabilization, improved EVF & autofocus, etc.) as well as file handling (IIRC, the 1st generation a7 & a7R didn't offer true lossless compression).
Thank you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-01-2019   #37
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,559
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
Don't you enjoy the post-processing though? I would think you do.
I mean I get the rumblings about the need for post process from those who posts straight from camera, But you (and I) are not those.
Sorry for my delay in responding. Yes Mikhail, I do enjoy PP - you are absolutely correct. To me it's not just an integral part of the image creation process, in a very real way it is THE key part of the process for many of my images.

I guess you and I come more from an artistic perspective - where the task is not to just capture an image but instead is to create an image. I think this is perhaps the reason I prefer digital imaging over film imaging. I could never do this stuff back in film days.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-01-2019   #38
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 10,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterm1 View Post
Sorry for my delay in responding. Yes Mikhail, I do enjoy PP - you are absolutely correct. To me it's not just an integral part of the image creation process, in a very real way it is THE key part of the process for many of my images.

I guess you and I come more from an artistic perspective - where the task is not to just capture an image but instead is to create an image. I think this is perhaps the reason I prefer digital imaging over film imaging. I could never do this stuff back in film days.
Peter,

This is an interesting POV. I pretty much in art school decades ago learned just the opposite, where I was trained to make negatives that could be consistently optimized and printed on a grade number two paper "straight printed."

In a way I continue this tradition from film to digital.

Digital offers a new creative freedom for sure.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-01-2019   #39
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterm1 View Post
Sorry for my delay in responding. Yes Mikhail, I do enjoy PP - you are absolutely correct. To me it's not just an integral part of the image creation process, in a very real way it is THE key part of the process for many of my images.

I guess you and I come more from an artistic perspective - where the task is not to just capture an image but instead is to create an image. I think this is perhaps the reason I prefer digital imaging over film imaging. I could never do this stuff back in film days.
Indeed.
I always preferred to make as "neutral" negatives as possible so I can manipulate them during printing. From multi-grade filters and split tone printing to intricate masking. That's as far as I ventured.
Then, of course, there is multiple exposures (on film or during printing) and/or printing from several negatives on one paper. Done that too.
But the freedom of manipulation that digital gives is something else.
So in some instances the image taking is just the beginning.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-01-2019   #40
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
Peter,

This is an interesting POV. I pretty much in art school decades ago learned just the opposite, where I was trained to make negatives that could be consistently optimized and printed on a grade number two paper "straight printed."

In a way I continue this tradition from film to digital.

Digital offers a new creative freedom for sure.

Cal
On subject of manipulation.
You may find interesting the Latvian photographer Egons Spuris.

http://www.egonsspuris.com/various

So this image, for example

It is comprised of 3 images, actually.
Printed on the same paper.
I think it's in Eastman Kodak Museum now, so belong to history already :-)

BTW, one of the images there is of the late guy (much younger at time) who I consider my teacher - Alexander Slyusarev
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Sliussarev



I had a privilege of many communications/discussions with him over last few years and that formed my tastes in photography that I have now.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:44.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.