You'd be wasting your money. The camera captures in color at the sensor. You cannot "shoot in B&W" with a full-color sensor. Setting the camera to B&W doesn't nothing except causing the camera to convert the color data to B&W in a JPEG output format.

You'd be better served shooting in full-color RAW and converting to B&W on your computer. You can apply color filters during that computer-based conversion, just as the 'filter' effect can be applied to the B&W JPEG conversion by the camera.

You can find free and for-purchase B&W software, maybe to automate the conversion or to give a larger selection of conversion options. Adobe Lightroom has a large selection of B&W effects and color filters, should you already subscribe to this software.

If you want more contrast in your B&W images, 1, edit the color data to completion of a color version of the image, then 2, convert that edit to B&W and adjust first the blacks, whites highlights, and shadow sliders, then the contrast, if needed. Apply too a color filter during the B&W conversion, if desired.

Here is a comparison done two different ways. The first image was done in color and converted to B&W in Lightroom and used a simulated red filter on a red rose. The second image is also a red rose, but was taken with my camera which has been modified to be a mono sensor by the removal of the CFA. An actual red filter was used. One detail needs to be added is that this camera also is full spectrum IR since the UV-IR cut filter was also removed. But this represents the quality of B&W image that comes from using a mono sensor.

Now I admit that the two images were taken on different days and different times.

But I always get superior B&W results with the mono sensor. The tonality is better and the images are not as harsh.

***********************************************************

Adding a third image taken using an Olympus EM5ii that has been modified to be full spectrum IR. Taken with a red filter. Converted to B&W in Lightroom using the B&W11 filter. Note: A red filter passes red plus all longer wavelengths. And with a full spectrum camera, it sees those longer wavelengths resulting in what we see here.

My conclusion here is that having IR light in the image has a big effect on the resulting B&W image with it approaching what I got with the mono sensor camera. In fact I have noticed that I get much better B&W images consistantly with my full spectrum camera than I do from my visible light only cameras.

So let's get down to the brass tacks of reality here. Black & white is a very difficult medium. As our eyes age and it becomes difficult for us to even distinguish subtle variations in tonality, it becomes more difficult for a photographer to even create an image worthy of display, and it becomes more and more difficult for an audience to discern why he even went to the trouble. The result is that probably 98 or 99% of those b&w images would much better have been left in color or just left. A few of them make pretty nice nostalgic snapshots, but some of those look nice framed up in the bathroom, but I don't even remember when I last saw a recent b&w image that rose to the level of fine art.

There's really absolutely nothing wrong with that, but it does beg the question of why there is so much needless salivating over how it got there or how much control is retained or required. It certainly has no bearing on the OP's original question of whether it would work to use the traditional filters used with monochrome film. Because it will. All the photographer has to do is to make sure Auto White Balance is turned off.

Are there other ways to accomplish monochrome images? Yes. At lease three other ways, as I outlined far above. Including the way you suggest. But they will all work. I've tried them all. I am weary to the bone of folks here claiming and promoting a method for accomplishing a process, then claiming that it is "the only way to do it." Or that it is the only way that a decent person would do it.

Listen...I've been to two night sky workshops, taught by two different individuals. Their methods (but more importantly, their underlying thinking) are completely different I also have seen a presentation at a club meeting by a third person who uses completely different equipment to accomplish the same or similar result in a radically different manner. I have learned all three approaches and methods. I can make each one work. I prefer one of the methods and choose to use it to the exclusion of the others. But I have friends who use both of those other methods and get quite good results. And if I am shooting with them, I can skillfully assist them, because I know and understand what they are doing. I can even do that while shooting my own preferred way at the same time.

Flexibility is an asset. So is understanding others.

That’s some serious spin. You said it’s better to shoot in B&W. I suggested the more flexible option to set the camera to B&W but shoot raw. You responded with nonsense about trying to get B&W prints from color negatives. I pointed out that shooting digital is completely different and that sensor data is the same whether you shoot B&W jpeg or raw, but that raw offers much more flexibility. Now you come back with this nonsense about flexibility. As for people shooting B&W today, I know several that do excellent B&aw work.

Wow! With apologies to Urnst, this has become a very comical discussion. Many theories voiced, some pretty loudly and energetically, but too much fear prevailing to actually pull out a red filter and try to see what happens. It doesn't even have to be exactly the right size for the experiment. Just hold it in front of the lens and shoot through it to see what you get. If you are really too afraid to try it yourself, borrow your grandson or granddaughter and get them to help you figure it out.

The lack of curiosity, willingness to investigate, and adventure here are real downers. Worse is the mass jump to discourage those who might have an original idea and the impulse to get their train back on the "proper" track. I'm out of this discussion. You folks do whatever suits you. I'm going to go see if I can learn something new. Probably won't share it here, though.

Wow! With apologies to Urnst, this has become a very comical discussion. Many theories voiced, some pretty loudly and energetically, but too much fear prevailing to actually pull out a red filter and try to see what happens. It doesn't even have to be exactly the right size for the experiment. Just hold it in front of the lens and shoot through it to see what you get. If you are really too afraid to try it yourself, borrow your grandson or granddaughter and get them to help you figure it out.

The lack of curiosity, willingness to investigate, and adventure here are real downers. Worse is the mass jump to discourage those who might have an original idea and the impulse to get their train back on the "proper" track. I'm out of this discussion. You folks do whatever suits you. I'm going to go see if I can learn something new. Probably won't share it here, though.