selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

That's who did mine in January, 2021.

Starting from the home screen https://monochromeimaging.com/ you can see that the conversions are not necessarily limited to Sony models. https://monochromeimaging.com/other-brands/

I suggest retaining the IR cut filter even if it costs a little more. I ended up having to get a bunch of individual cut filters which ended up costing a lot more.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

I bought a number UV-IR filters on eBay that come from China and were not very expensive. They work great. And I absolutely love having the ability to do mono in IR.

And I used monochrome imaging too. Did mine in June 2020.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

The only thing that is idiotic is your post.

If you don’t like monochrome, that’s your choice, but then why would you even open this thread?

Are trying to start an argument? Nobody will argue with what you like or don’t like because nobody cares.

Physlab Loc: Portland, OR

No. I used software to convert to monochrome or B&W. I think I used Luminar Neo to make the conversion to B&W. I frequently use On1 Photo RAW to post-process images.

The camera was the Olympus OM-D Mark III and I think I had on the 12-100mm Pro lens.

Lowell

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

There are things that mono does much better than using a CFA sensor. Astroastronomy is one of those things.

Attached are 3 examples, all taken with a focal length of 360mm. The 1st one is the famous Ring Nebula. At 360mm FL, it is quite small. Zoom in to see that it has a hole in the center. It takes a whole lot more FL to make bigger. Beneath it towards the bottom is a bright star, when you zoom in, notice the 3 dim stars shown within the boundary of that star. If this had been done using a sensor with a CFA, then demosaicing would have blurred the boundaries such that those dimmer stars would not show themselves as distinctly as they do here, and perhaps would have been blurred out completely.

The last image is using a color sensor (Olympus EM5ii) and a larger telescope (710mm FL and 102mm objective compared to the 1st image (360mm FL and 60mm objective)

I have added a side-by-side as the last image. The left side is the mono image and the right is the color image. I rotated the mono image to get it close to the same orientation as the right hand image. Ignore the diagonal streak on the right side where possibly a jet flew over. This was a stack and some of it still remains. Near the top on both sides is a double star. Look how sharp it is on the mono image. Another double star below it on the diagonal jet trail. The stars are just a bit farther apart and the color was able to keep them separate.

But I must also admit that my tracking was off a bit on the color image as the stars are stretched a bit. Besides that, the mono image, even with the smaller scope, is sharper. But the larger scope sees fainter stars.

Ring Nebula

(Download)

M51 galaxy

(Download)

M101 galaxy

(Download)

Ring Nebula w 710mm FL and color sensor

(Download)

mono on left, color on right

(Download)

Floyd Gingrich

I like the color shot.

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

A stellar group of stellar shots ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

An impressive, well-shot formation 🖤🖤✨🖤🖤

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

"converted a7ii to B&W with orange filter" ORpilot

An endearing rendering with superb counterpoint in contrasting tonal range used creatively to create a dream within a dream... With that said, it is the absolutely telling compositional elements that takes this rendering entirely to the next level.

Was so incredibility impressed with your elegant rendering that I pulled up your UHH BIO only to find your credentials
Retired College Instructor of Photography. BFA and MFA in photography. kudos on your amazing journey.

On a site where far too many jump up an down in a effort to broadcasting how Great! they are...
You kind sir allow your masterful creative efforts to speak for themselves instead... Validating your forte in fine art photography beyond any shadow of doubt. Thank you for sharing your astonishing and breathtaking visual statement in this thread ORpilot. I'm awestruck by it's wondrous visual merits...

UHH is a far better place with contributors such as youself ORpilot
All the best on your continued journey...

brentrh Loc: Deltona, FL

Shooting RAW them post processing will give you same results as black and white sensor

brentrh Loc: Deltona, FL

Monochrome camera has no advantage over shooting RAW and post processing. After removing color from RAW you may have small improvements in contrast

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

Thanks for your kind words

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

Your statement is not correct ... At least with my converted Sony a7ii vs any of my Sony cameras. Please go to the company web site https://monochromeimaging.com and read what they have to say. Shooting raw and converting to mono vs a Mono only camera is not the same, they may be close but not the same. Is Diet Coke the same as regular coke.....

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

Thank you for your kind words. I deeply appreciate the eloquence that you praised my work. As a teacher and not a photographer turned teach. I strive to be well informed and to not point fingers. Everyone can always learn something new. Many do not appreciate the research, testing of equipment, and application of procedures and principals that 6 years of intensive academic learning involve. A good teacher stays on top of the latest and greatest. You have given me a great boost in energy with your praise. Thanks you. and a thank a fellow academia gwilliams6 for his eloquent answering of UHH questions no matter how many pointed arrows we receive.

Thank You Brent Bunch

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Wrong on both counts. Go back to page one and absorb the information.

This image would not have been as sharp converted from a color raw capture.

A7 II monochrome

(Download)