borge
Established
A small write-up with some examples on the MM's dynamic range and shadow detail recovery capabilities:
http://bophotography.net/2012/11/18/leica-m-monochrom-performing-recovery-on-my-exposure-mistakes/
http://bophotography.net/2012/11/18/leica-m-monochrom-performing-recovery-on-my-exposure-mistakes/
bonatto
looking out
and THATs where the value of the monochrom lies. pretty impressive. Any banding at higher ISO if underexposed?
borge
Established
Well nobody should be worried about under-exposing to save highlights at least, since it is very easy to bring back shadow details in post.
I haven't seen any banding on my shots. I did try to increase the exposure of a 10000 ISO file that was taken partially against a black sky during midnight, and could see some visible banding on the part where the black sky was then. But at 10000 ISO and by pushing the exposure against a black background that is totally acceptable.
mfogiel
Mentor
Interesting, this actually means, that the Monochrom is actually better than even Leica thinks ! By underexposing 4 stops you finally get rid of burnt highlights ! In practice, it is a ISO 1000-40.000 camera ! Don't make this known to Canon or Nikon executives - they could get a heart attack!
Michalm
Well-known
I must admit this looks awesome , i'm waiting for reasonably priced camera that can do something like it.
ray*j*gun
Mentor
I recently used my M8 (shooting in RAW) in a store where the subject was back lit by picture windows. When i saw the file at home in Lightroom I was amazed at the face detail I was able to draw out of the shadows. I mean the M8 is no Monochrome but i was blown away!!
ray*j*gun
Mentor
here are 2 examples
after
after
Hmmm, how about overexposure?
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Overexposure - don't. On any digital camera. as simple as that.
brbo
Well-known
I guess those executives are just fine. Their cameras can do same shadow and better highlight recovery. With double pixel size and in full color.
The fact that a Leica can do what several high level DSLRs have been doing for a couple of years is some achievment I guess! 
bonatto
looking out
The fact that a Leica can do what several high level DSLRs have been doing for a couple of years is some achievment I guess!
When you consider the small package they are able to jam everything into + rangefinder coupling mechanism, it's pretty impressive. I think with any tech, it's interesting to see companies pushing boundaries. If you consider what apple managed to squeeze into an iPhone 5, it's along the same lines as the M digital series. I'd like to see a full frame competitor at similar size (it's getting there though)!
borge
Established
The fact that a Leica can do what several high level DSLRs have been doing for a couple of years is some achievment I guess!
You can do it, yes, but since those cameras has color filters you get lots of interpolation artifacts from pushing the files so far. There are absolutely no downsides to pushing the MM's files to the limit. Show me a 5D3 file that you can push +5 stops without banding, interpolation artifacts and lots of blotchy ugly noise, even at base ISO.
brbo
Well-known
Aren't there literally countless examples of that on the net?!
Just one of them (6EV underexposure on D600)...
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Thanks - the DR in that shot is about 1 1/2 stop and the contrast non-existent.
brbo
Well-known
Examples form OP are pretty poor in that regard, too. And they were better exposed to begin with.
I'm not bashing the Monochrom. Just saying that half a decade old sensor technology (even if you remove color ability) is not better than current FF sensors.
I'm not bashing the Monochrom. Just saying that half a decade old sensor technology (even if you remove color ability) is not better than current FF sensors.
borge
Established
You base your posts on your own assumptions and not facts.
I have several 5D3 and X-Pro1 files that I have worked with extensively previously, which is some of the latest and greatest cameras on the market with modern CMOS sensors. One of the sensors (X-Pro1) isn't a full frame sensor, but that doesn't really matter at all.
By pushing the files from these sensors you get a whole lot of interpolation artifacts and other artifacts as well as very visible banding and noise even at base ISO (100 for the 5D3 and 200 for the X-Pro1). Compared to the files from the MM the effective useable quality for print and high quality presentations on the MM files are far better. The useable latitude is far greater.
I'm not comparing sensors either. The sensors themself doesn't interest me at all. The fact that the files from the MM doesn't need to be interpolated in the same way as every other camera has to be (due to CFA's) is probably the main reason for the difference.
I base my articles on my own experience, and the freedom and useable latitude that I have experienced with the MM so far is incredible and really surprising as well. I don't care if it's CMOS, CCD, old sensor, new sensor, old camera, new camera, or whatever. The result is what matters, and that is the point of my articles. So far the files from the MM has surprised me in regards to how far you can push the files in post-processing compared to other cameras that I have taken several tens of thousands of exposures with (X-Pro1, 5D3, 5D2, 60D, 40D).
brbo
Well-known
Ok, yes, Canon is pretty bad at that particular scenario (lifting shadows at base ISO). Besides, I think that they are a bit behind Sony/Nikon at the moment. I should've made it clear that I meant "good current generation sensors". I posted a link to a low-end FF from current generation (Nikon D600) that doesn't show banding and "a whole lot of interpolation artifacts" (whatever that means) when underexposed -6EV. And internet is littered with pretty impressive samples that show NO banding (yes, there is a bit of chroma noise, but if the comparison is Monochrom, this should be irrelevant).
So, how much better is a "good current generation sensor" than your Canon 5DIII in shadows at base ISO? This much.
But, it's true, I don't know the facts... In your opinion, how much better is DR in Monocrom compared to Nikon D800?
So, how much better is a "good current generation sensor" than your Canon 5DIII in shadows at base ISO? This much.
But, it's true, I don't know the facts... In your opinion, how much better is DR in Monocrom compared to Nikon D800?
True. That's the holy grail in digital... that would be magic to me. Underexposure isn't. Many modern digitals can recover severe underexposure in the daylight.