Monochrome (Page 2): In March at a workshop in Death Valley, one of the participants had the Leica Q2 (monochrome only-I think this the correct model name) and the images the Q2...

Jerry Coupe Loc: Kent, WA

In March at a workshop in Death Valley, one of the participants had the Leica Q2 (monochrome only-I think this the correct model name) and the images the Q2 produced appeared extremely good to my eye.

I probably do not have the most critical eye for extremely small differences, but the Q2 seemed to produce very good images.

Physlab Loc: Portland, OR

ORpilot wrote:

Yes'm These were shot within 30 in of each other . The color is with Sony a7iii . Then the color converted was done on apple photos to mono. No alteration to either. The last is the converted Sony a7ii B&W with red filter. Enjoy

How do I access the images? I only see a very small color photo.

Lowell

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

User ID wrote:

As I understand it a true mono only camera has two... (show quote)

If using the OVF not the EVF, one still sees the subject in color and must mentally visualize it in mono. Personally I cannot justify paying over 2K$ for a monochrome only camera when I feel perfectly comfortable testing the color photos, taken with my less than 1K$ camera, by de-saturating all colors to see if I’d like a particular photo in B/W.

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

Physlab wrote:

How do I access the images? I only see a very small color photo.

Lowell

Try pulling the site again. It's possible you got to it before I finished loading all 3 photos

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Physlab wrote:

Your request posed a question for me. Would anyone be able to demonstrate the difference between an image made using a monochrome camera and the identical subject made in color but converted to black and white? Is the difference noticeable?

Lowell

If you pick an arbitrary subject and make the comparison you suggest you might be hard pressed to see the difference. But that's approaching the issue from the wrong direction.

If you want to take pictures of cars, flowers or colorful clothing, by all means shoot color, especially in daylight. But if the lighting is flat and the colors are bland, B&W might be better choice. Architecture, people and landscapes can look good in B&W.

A photographer why understands B&W would not pick a subject at random. They would select one that lends itself to B&W because of the content and lighting of the scene. Sharp detail. local contrast and rich tonal values that show shapes are good choices.

If you can commit to B&W images, at least for some of your photography, a dedicated B&W capture, digital or film, will focus your mind.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

PhotogHobbyist wrote:

If using the OVF not the EVF, one still sees the subject in color and must mentally visualize it in mono.

Not if you set the camera to display a B&W JPEG image. Just don't use the camera's JPEG.

The color is in the raw file. Use that to create the B&W image on your computer.

Physlab Loc: Portland, OR

Got it. The third image (converted Sony) borders on sepia tone so I can tell a difference.

Lowell

Physlab Loc: Portland, OR

Here is a sample image of the Tillicum Crossing Bridge in Portland, OR. Monochrome aids the viewer in concentrating on the structure.

Lowell

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Physlab wrote:

Here is a sample image of the Tillicum Crossing Bridge in Portland, OR. Monochrome aids the viewer in concentrating on the structure.

Lowell

Thar's a great example where a color version would not have been as interesting.

Statues in ancient Greece were often colorized because the common people felt they looked more appealing. Fortunately, time has faded and washed the colors away and we now can appreciate the shapes as they were originally created.

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

Physlab wrote:

Here is a sample image of the Tillicum Crossing Bridge in Portland, OR. Monochrome aids the viewer in concentrating on the structure.

Lowell

And it sure is a gorgeous, eye catching one 🖤🤍👀🤍🖤

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

ORpilot wrote:

Yes, These were shot within 30 min of each other . The color is with Sony a7iii . Then the color converted was done on apple photos to mono. No alteration to either. The last is the converted Sony a7ii B&W with red filter. Enjoy

Magnificent, any way you treat it 💎💎💎💎💎

User ID

Physlab wrote:

Your request posed a question for me. Would anyone be able to demonstrate the difference between an image made using a monochrome camera and the identical subject made in color but converted to black and white? Is the difference noticeable?

Lowell

I have observed some results that defy "experts" who happen to be very much prejudiced toward toadally silver based BW (film and prints).

User ID

selmslie wrote:

Not if you set the camera to display a B&W JPEG image. Just don't use the camera's JPEG.

The color is in the raw file. Use that to create the B&W image on your computer.

Youre replying to a comment regarding OVFs. Show us how an OVF can display monochrome imagery ;-)

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

User ID wrote:

Youre replying to a comment regarding OVFs. Show us how an OVF can display monochrome imagery ;-)

The LCD displays the camera’s JPEG. We have been referring to mirrorless cameras. DSLRs are passé.

User ID

PhotogHobbyist wrote:

If using the OVF not the EVF, one still sees the subject in color and must mentally visualize it in mono. Personally I cannot justify paying over 2K$ for a monochrome only camera when I feel perfectly comfortable testing the color photos, taken with my less than 1K$ camera, by de-saturating all colors to see if I’d like a particular photo in B/W.

Amen re: $$$ !

As I said, I could be possibly tempted by a REEEEEEEEEEALLY cheap used Pentax monochrome. Even then, I might get fed up with it since Im not very fond of SLRs, and especially not APSC SLRs. I would be using it in its awkward Live View mode.