Another Monochrome Digital

Jarred Land announced the Epic-M Monochrome over at Reduser.net yesterday. I quote:

• Newly Developed Mysterium-X Monochrome Sensor.
• Native ASA 2000.
• Increased net resolution (removal of the debayer process, so every single individual pixel is used for luminance/image data )
• New Low Pass Filter...to accomodate the reduced pixel pitch (1x1 vs. 2x2 Bayer)
• $42,000 (brain only) includes upgrade to Dragon Monochrome Sensor, spring 2013.
• David Fincher [link ours —Ed.] is shooting his current project solely on Epic-M Monochrome cameras as we speak.
• Pre-orders open on red.com Monday...ships October 1st.

End quote. I'll take two.

I love the commenter who says, "Hmmm...trying to grasp the significance of this. Does this somehow mean that all color will be added in post? Even as I say that it sounds weird but otherwise...what? Just B&W images?" Sometimes I really feel like I am living in some sort of weird parallel Universe. (This has been an especially weird week.)

There are no sample images later in the post, as of now. Just in case you're tempted to go looking for them.

Re the price, memories are growing dim already, but this was the way it was in the early days of digital in the 1990s. Six-megapixel digital SLRs the size of fat books (most of which said "Kodak" on them...again, what happened there?) cost $25,000. It looked in those days like only newsrooms and top pros were ever going to be able to afford them. The story of the next decade was in part the story of trickle-down, as digital technology entered the realm of the affordable (for various definitions of "affordable") from the top.

I hope I live long enough to see the same migration in monochrome digital that we saw between a mid-1990s Kodak/Nikon or Kodak/Canon digital SLR versus, say, the Sony RX100 I shot with last Thursday. Somehow I'm pessimistic, but hey, "could happen."

Mike
(Thanks to Nico Burns)

Send this post to a friend

Please help support TOP by patronizing our sponsors B&H Photo and Amazon

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2012 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.

Featured Comment by Stan B.: "Mine's a cheaper, smaller, albeit less advanced but better looking version...."

Featured Comment by Daniel Evan Rodriguez: "Of all the current players, my guess is that Fuji will be the first with an 'attainable' monochrome camera. The X line may be the perfect platform for this, and considering the defining characteristics of the X-Series (viewfinder, manual controls, idiosyncratic sensor), a B&W-only option doesn't really seem like that much of a stretch."

Featured Comment by Kevin Purcell: "Note it has a optical low pass filter (unlike the Leica Monochrom). I've heard others say 'oh, it's monochrome so it's doesn't need a OLPF because there's no color moiré.' This has become another internet trope that photographers 'know' that isn't actually true. There isn't color moiré, of course, but that's not the only aliasing artifact that an OLPF supresses. There is luminance moiré, stairstepping, and much more. Sampling theory requires the any digitized signal to be 'band limited' for faithful reproduction (avoiding aliasing artifacts). Depending what you photograph you will see more or less of it (sometimes you'll see it when you least suspect it).

"One other point about monchrome cameras is they still need a filter on chip in the same place as the Bayer filters to flatten out spectral response . A raw silicon sensor doesn't have the color response that silver halide has. Leica have done that really well on the Leica Monochrom.

"Making a monochrome sensor is really down to asking the fab to make a custom sensor that changes the RGGB dyes for a single color dye. It's an almost trivial change (once you have the dye or dye mix you want) so there are no technical issues.

"The major issue is can you make a profit from a niche market for a monochrome camera? Of all the current camera makers I see Fuji being the most likely to do this."

Comments

[peter wijninga]

Three red dots instead of one!

[Patrick Perez]

Weird that Red seems to be going back to rating using ASA instead of ISO.

On a related tangent (?) I wonder why cine digital cameras haven't started using 3 chip, which was common in video.

Patrick

[John Robison]

"...what? Just B&W images?"

A couple of decades past a workmate of my wife wanted a casual family portrait, the parents and two young kids. They specifically wanted B&W so I loaded up my C-220 with TX.
Shot a roll, 12 exposures, 5X5 proofs and they selected one for a 16X16 enlargement for the wall.

A week or so later I ran into the mom who related the funny story of her mother's reaction to the picture. She said her mother was concerned that her daughter and son in law were having money problems since they could only afford a B&W photo, and not color. She said even after she assured her mom that the family were doing fine and that she really wanted B&W her mom was still not sure she was telling the truth.

Go figure.

[c.d.embrey]

I'm sorta surprised that Fuji didn't release a B&W "retro look" camera. They have their own drummer and always have made unique cameras.

They make their sensors and have a history of using different technology than others. Sounds like a no-brainer to me.

I'd by one if it was a B&W X-E1 (not X-Pro1) and the price was about
$1,500.00.

[Michael]

As nice as it would be to see, say, a Fuji X-Pro1-M, I doubt this will come any time soon. Well, actually, if any it will be Fuji probably.

For the rest? They all love colour and rather do the "decolouring" (as someone put it to me once) in post. "Just in case" they ever need the colour image.

I think we now have at least one generation of new photographers for whom B&W and really was an option, both technologically and stylistic. Or as someone else put it to me once: "I don't get why you still shoot B&W, it looks old and antiquated, unless someone comes up with something new for B&W I stick with colour." (or something to that effect).

[Albin]

If one notices this costs as much as a decent car, the rate of price depreciation on it would be frightening, unless one thinks it's going to be a "classic" or a museum piece in a few years.

[levonne]

hmmmm... there is no end to what we buy for our camera hobbies!

[Mike Johnston]

"If one notices this costs as much as a decent car..."

I'd say much more than "decent." The most expensive car I've ever owned cost $17,000 less than this camera does. And several were very decent cars indeed.

Depends on your perspective I guess.

Mike

[Sarge]

I'm betting on Ricoh-Pentax... but that's just wishful thinking on the part of a GXR owner.

Sigma, on the other hand, may want to diversify into yet another niche market. They're not shy about asking (high) prices for limited runs.

[Lars]

"For the rest? They all love colour and rather do the "decolouring" (as someone put it to me once) in post. 'Just in case' they ever need the colour image."

Don't forget, that when you convert from color to b&w in post, you have a lot more options via the channel mixer. With a purely b&w camera you'd have to start using filters again.

[hugh crawford]

$42,000 is so cheap in the world of feature film production that there isn't any real difference between paying for this and getting it for free.

And everybody rents this stuff anyway.

On the other hand for a hobbyist/artist price might be an issue, but still $42,000 would represent a smallish fraction of what you would spend to use this.

It's interesting that the tools to make movies of a technical quality that surpases what state of the art movie theaters can exhibit (you want expensive, go price a 6k projector) are falling into the well heeled dilatant price range.

BTW someone mentioned the aliasing filter. Moire that is unnoticeable in a still image will wrench your eyes from their sockets in video. That seems to be a weak point in DSLR video.

RE: the cost vs a decent car. There are cine camera lens shades that cost more than I have *ever* paid for a car and that includes a Maserati and a Porsche (not that either was decent in any conventional sense) as well as a pretty decent Volvo. New car prices are are of course not within the realm of decency.

[Andrew Kirk]

Who needs this silly artifact? Most assuredly not Giles Duley (see previous post, FHS).

[Mark Roberts]

I guess I just don't share the desire for a "black & white only" digital camera. With B&W film, one of the great joys is being able to switch between different films; not just films with different sensitivities but with different responses to the various wavelengths of light across the visible spectrum. With a digital sensor those options are gone: the spectral response you buy with the camera is the one you've got forever. (And I don't see the blunt instrument of colored filters making up for this.)

[ctein]

Dear Folks,

Ummm, you all do understand this is a CINEMA camera, right?

I mean, you can use it for single frame photography -- they'll do 1 frame/sec if you want -- but that's not the primary customer base for the Epic. It's a motion picture camera that happens to be good enough to use as a high-end still camera.

Price 35-70mm professional motion picture film gear and then we can talk about whether this is "overpriced." (Stan, your camera is very nice, but it can't play in this league.)

pax / Ctein

[Mike Johnston]

All the Reds are motion picture cameras, aren't they? There were some rumors a couple of years ago that they were working on a DSLR, but I don't think anything ever came of it.

But they do use Reds for still shoots in the fashion world, methinks.

Mike

[Lars]

Ctein, the Red cameras are marketed as DSMC, meaning Digital Still and Motion Camera. So they are intended to shoot stills, although certainly not targeted at the normal photographer. Considering their website, the target market seems to be fashion photography.

[Stan B.]

Ctein- No, no where close; it just doesn't look like a carburetor is all.

[Ri chard Newman]

Back in film days, for a while, I carried two Nikons, one with color film, and the other B&W. Trying to decide which to use was sometimes a problem, nearly as bad as the need to lens swap on the go. I would someimes see two or three images in color and B&W from one negative. Finally, I got smart, exposed everything on slide film and did internegatives in my darkroom when I wanted B&W. Using filters, I could change balance. A steep learning curve, but worth it. Now, with Pshop and channels, I have the same capability only better, more controlled and quicker. I haven't used 35mm film in at least 4 years and don't miss it at all. Ain't progress grand??

[Daniel S.]

As far as my income- and german-deprived self is concerned, the best feature of this camera is that trailing "e" at the end of its name. Gives me an excuse for when I confuse the name of that blasted Leica.

[Timothy]

In post 113 in the Reduser thread a user links to another monochrome cine camera: the A-Cam dII Panchromatic Carl T. Dreyer Edition. The moniker's homage to Carl Dreyer is appreciated--it has been said while praising cinematographs that one could 'take any frame and hang it in a gallery' and there are few films this describes as well as Ordet.

[Tom Voigt]

>But they do use Reds for still shoots in the fashion world, methinks.

There is a six page fold out Red ad in the latest Vogue - the 916 page behemoth. "The camera that changed cinema is now changing fashion."

[Reg Paley]

WHY?

[scott kirkpatrick]

See the switch on the handgrip of the RED at trigger-finger position? It offers two choices, S and M, and I think for the person who is going to postprocess the flood of bits that this puppy will generate, the terminology "S&M" is quite appropriate.

scott

[Hugh Crawford]

I imagine that reverting to ASA from ISO has something to do with the flexibility of conforming to a non existant standard, but if vgotvba RED camera wouldn't GOST be more appropriate?

[Tom]

Appears to have designed by the Borg.

[alex-virt]

The best options for monochrome shooting are Sigma DP2M and the upcoming DP1M. They are small, light, have high quality prime lenses and HUGE resolution. There is no Bayer filter, so you don't lose resolution when converting to BW but still have colour information for channel mixing. These cameras are unusable for colour shooting at ISOs more than 800 but can make pretty good BW shots up to 6400.

The only drawback is that the only available RAW converter is user unfriendly, but it can't be worse than a darkroom, can it?

[bruce alan greene]

for Ctein:

A quick look on e-bay showed an Arri BL III 35mm camera kit for, "buy it now" at $3,250...

I've got a 35mm BL 1 in my garage. It's gathering dust in preparation for my museum :) I used it on "The Mask" and Francis Coppola's "Dracula". It's in good working condition too!

[Dave in NM]

"...it just doesn't look like a carburetor is all."

Stan B. - that's the funniest thing I've read all week. I'm glad I wasn't holding a cup of coffee when I read it...

[hugh crawford]

If 35mm costs about $10,000 an hour to shoot just for film and lab costs , so after 4 hours this is free, right?

At 48fps it will be free in only two hours !

[Event Photographer]

Sorry I must be missing something with this camera - why would you pay that kind of money for it?