["Open Mike" is the Editorial Page of TOP. I'm a little late this week. If you don't see the point here, or don't feel the same, don't worry, I understand. I'm in the minority on this topic and I know it. —Mike]
-
I've made this case in more detail in the past, but, since it came up the other day, one more time:
The reason I'd like for there to be an affordable, utilitarian B&W-only digital camera or two is that I see like the camera sees. If the camera records color, then I see color. I'm actually very good at seeing in B&W (after years of shooting B&W film if for no other reason). But I have trouble seeing in B&W when I know the camera is seeing in color. This is just the way I am and yes, I understand the same thing is not true of everybody. Of course.
But it's true for me, and I doubt there is nobody else like me.
More generally, what I want is for photographers to have the tools they need, that's all, as options. Any time a photographer is stymied or obstructed in the work he or she is trying to do by a lack of tools or materials, then that's a deficiency in the marketplace in my opinion. You might object that manufacturers are businesses and only trying to make a profit, period, but that's just looking at it entirely from the manufacturer's point of view. And that's just not how I look at it. Because that's not whose side I'm on. I'm on the side of photographers who are trying to express themselves. That's been my position since I started writing for photography magazines in 1987. I'd like us to have choices. The fact that a certain product does not exist might be explained in terms of the profit motive, but that doesn't somehow transform it into a good thing. It's still a deficiency in my view.
Besides, if the concept of a B&W-only camera is so irrational and senseless, then why does Leica make them and why do experienced, accomplished photographers like Peter Turnley shoot with them?
Some people can't buy this! $8,295 with no lens.
The problem is not that nobody wants one. The problem is that there are many people for whom Leicas are just not accessible because they're Veblen goods and priced out of reach.
I'm not saying every manufacturer should make affordable B&W-only cameras or that there should be a lot of them. If they're not profitable then that makes no sense. But many manufacturers make products that are not specifically profitable, to enlarge their system and make the system more attractive overall. It's been that way for many decades. Ideally, you'd think at least one or two would make an effective, utilitarian B&W-only camera.
You might also argue that manufacturers can't make such a product because it would depend on making a dedicated sensor and a sensor is a large investment that requires high sales in order to justify. Okay, but, again, that just explains the status quo, it doesn't turn the status quo into a desirable state of affairs.
I just wish there were a couple of affordable, accessible options available, that's all. For those who want them. It's not actually as radical a stance as some people like to make it out to be.
Mike
(Bonus: Alan Schaller's work with a Monochrom. Do you like his tones?)
P.S. Now off to the shed to paint all day! I love the smell of primer in the morning; it smells like...victory.
Original contents copyright 2020 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Thanks to all our Patreon contributors!
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
mark b: "I've found, particularly as I age, that the market is less and less likely to produce exactly the things I want. I think it's partly explained by the crapification of the economy, but maybe more largely due to my own idiosyncratic tastes evolving (or maybe calcifying) as I grow older. Mike, we're about the same age; it may be something we just have to get used to."
brian: "This may or not comport with your concept of affordability, but a monochrome-converted Sony is still less expensive than a monochrome Leica."
Jack: "You could have put the pool table in your house. You chose to have a separate house just for pool.
"You could have set your color camera for B&W only. You didn’t choose to have a separate camera for B&W.
"Pool is clearly a higher calling for you than B&W.
"So says a guy who did choose to have a separate camera for B&W. My M10M may have been cheaper than your shed.
"But you can share your shed with friends. Only two of my friends know how to use a rangefinder.
"Enjoy your shed."
Mike replies: Well, point taken, but regarding "You could have put the pool table in your house," actually, no. There is absolutely no place in the house, barn, or basement where a pool table might fit, not even the smallest 6' bar-table size, not even in the living room emptied of furniture. Not even if I moved out of the master bedroom and started sleeping in the smaller bedroom. Not even the attic of the barn (which would have had to be insulated)—the roof interferes. I considered every possibility—even enclosing the covered patio! (Not big enough.) You basically need a 13x17' rectangle of unobstructed space at a minimum for the smallest table, and that I did not have anywhere until I built the shed.
That was the problem the shed solves. I wouldn't have done it otherwise.
And re "You could have set your color camera for B&W only. You didn’t choose to have a separate camera for B&W," that's kind of the problem I've been discussing. I do have a second camera (the X-T1) that does very well with B&W conversions, and I try to think of it as "my B&W camera." The problem is that it's still shooting color even when I mean to be shooting B&W—the raw file is still there—and whenever I try to shoot "only B&W" I always end up shooting both. Again, it's not a technical problem, it's a conceptual and perceptual problem. I understand it may not be for others.
Bryan William Jones: "It's not an understatement to say that shooting a B&W-only camera changed my life, in that despite shooting B&W film so many years ago, getting a lesson in seeing light, independent from color, hue, and white balance in a digital format has been a masterclass in rediscovering photography."
Dave Millier: "There are some reasons why B&W cameras score over colour cameras for B&W. The absence of the colour filter array:
- Removes the need for demosaicing—which will improve sharpness and detail for a given pixel count. How much will vary with the colour spectrum of the subject but it will likely be 25–50%. So a 40MP B&W will have the luminance detail of, say, a 60MP Bayer filter sensor.
- Increases the sensor sensitivity = lower noise at all settings—any residual noise at high ISO will look more fine grained and eve.
- May even improve dynamic range.
"No guarantees you will see these improvements in a significant way as that would all be down to how well it was implemented, but many photographers would likely agree these are worthwhile gains that for specialists are more than enough to offset the loss of the colour information."
Daniel Speyer: "I don’t think you are in a minority, or at least not if we ask how we do things. For example, I recall there was a famous (Southern) writer who could not write when he was deprived of ability to hand-write. The typewriter was not the same thing. People use large format because it fits they way they think/work, and not because it has greater resolution. Seems likely that seeing in color or knowing the sensor sees in color is a huge change. Often we do best when we are limited in what we must work with, and we know it."
Rick: "Folks have been urging Fuji for years to do this with a variant of the X100 series, but they keep saying 'No.' I gather they think there is not enough demand. We need one of these companies to do a Kickstarter and really test that demand. I think they'd be surprised. I'd jump on it."
Lloyd Gagnon: "I have the same problem. I’ll end up debating if the image looks better in color or B&W. The only solution I’ve come up with is to shoot B&W film. I am looking at new cameras and did consider the Leica Q2 Monochrome, until I got to the price."
Frank Gorga: "Although I consider myself primarily a black-and-white guy, I would probably not buy a monochrome camera even if I could afford it. One of the strengths of digital black-and-white photography is the fine control one has over the tonalities when going from the 'real world' (i.e. color) to shades of gray. Manipulating the color channels sliders in Lightroom et al. gives one an larger number of different, say, red filters rather than just the one or two 'strengths' of physical filters typically available. Additionally, one can readily apply the equivalent of multiple colored filters to an image digitally. All of that control is lost if the camera does not record color data. Losing this is too much of a step backward for me."
Chris Kilkes: "Years ago when I started shooting and had no idea what I was doing and so shot with every automated tool I could use, I’d have read this post and been perplexed. But as I developed as a photographer and learned what I was doing, moving from Canon to Sony and now to Fuji, becoming a mostly manual shooting photographer in the process, I have to say I wholeheartedly agree. I’d love to pay less for a high quality camera that was stripped down in return. No video capabilities, no flip screen, not automatic modes, no WiFi or Bluetooth, very rudimentary menus—as long as it came with the types of easy-to-access controls of my X-T2 and other Fuji cameras, I’d be truly a happier man. Because by paying less for each individual camera I’d buy them more frequently to keep up with the tech. As it is now it’ll be years before I buy a new camera since they’re only getting more expensive. I hate to say it but I feel guilty (and cranky because of it; why do the manufacturers do this?) at all the complex capabilities of my cameras that I never use."
Bob Rosinsky: "A mirrorless camera with a monochrome 30x30mm sensor would be a dream come true, at least it would for me."
Daniel: "Have been lobbying Fuji since the X-Pro1 to make an X-ProM, a fully monochrome version of their rangefinder styled camera. 'Not needed' has generally been the response. Keep pushing and maybe we'll see an affordable B&W option from someone soon."
Phillip J Stiles: "My Sony cameras have 'creative style' settings that have 'black and white' as an option. With that setting, what you see in the viewfinder is black and white. The B&W is recorded as a JPEG, but you may also record a raw file that captures color. This gives you several options, among them the ability to process the raw file in whatever B&W style you prefer (See, for example, the NIK Silver FX Pro plugins.) Or you can always use the raw file for color. Fuji cameras have a very similar ability, 'advanced filters.' Canon calls theirs 'Picture Style' with a 'monochrome option' that includes additional adjustments. There's an argument that a dedicated B&W sensor will give higher resolution, but how many of us need to go bigger than 16x20, and wouldn't we use medium format if we did?
"We already have affordable B&W digital cameras."
Robert Johnston [no relation —Ed.]: "I remember having to carry two camera bodies with me if I wanted to take colour and mono. Why would I want to go back to that? If a photographer were totally devoted to black and white then it might make sense for him. Even then though, it removes the possibility of making tonal changes via the colour channels. Using colour filters on the lens is by comparison a crude adjustment. Your Fuji has several black and white film emulations, so the viewfinder can display in black and white. In short Mike, I just don't get it—sorry."
hugh crawford: "The problem is that if there was a monochrome camera, would it be like Tri-X or Pan-X? Or god forbid that hideous T-Max stuff? I’d want a Verichrome, or my favorite of all films, Aerographic Pan. Or at least some Agfa film. I’d settle for Pan-X but that was a lost cause before digital.
"A couple bricks of Verichrome and I’d build a new darkroom."
Mike replies: Verichrome was my holy grail, er, favorite film. Just phasing out as I came along. And Medalist chlorobromide paper.
Your point is a very good one, and would need to be addressed in a separate post. Part of the reason I don't like most digital B&W is that it's technically deficient, but part of the reason is that the styles have changed. I have a number of friends who just don't like the chosen tonal rendition of the Leica Monochroms. Making the cost a moot point.
Chris H: "I get it—I felt the same way when shooting with B&W films vs. color ones. Heck, you'd see differently 'in color' between slide vs negative color films. And yes, in response to many of the comments I see here, the view through the finder was always in color. I get the utility of seeing something of the result in an electronic viewfinder, and I bet it's an indispensable practical feature to various practitioners of photography. It's not big on my list though - I'm young enough that the majority of my life has been spent in the digital camera age but I can appreciate viewing a color scene and interpreting it in my head for the monochrome medium I'm shooting with. That being said, I'm fortunate to have the original CCD Monochrom, which I bought used a few years ago. It's not cheap, but significantly less than a new one and works great. In fact, it feels almost as good as shooting B&W film. :O) It's not all roses though, as those old CCDs can't be replaced and are susceptible to corrosion. It appears there are outfits that can repair them coming online though, for a price... but I still keep an eye out for a deal on a backup."
Mani Sitaraman: "Alan Schaller's tones are what used to be decried as a 'soot and chalk' look, in the heyday of film. I remember a certain darkroom magazine editor using the term. For some reason, Leica pushes the look (pardon the pun) on its site, in the pictures accompanying their Monochrom M camera. I think it doesn't work very well, aesthetically speaking, for his pictures. Horses for courses, different strokes etc. etc.
"This used to be well known, but Henri Cartier-Bresson was constantly scolding his lab guy to go for less contrast, to bring up as many of the middle greys as possible. Of course, that was him, and others, notably in the 19th century, went for a different look, and Ansel Adams turned tonality into an exact science. So, short answer, no, I'm dismayed by the look. As an aside, while very expensive monochrome sensors are a choice, as far as I know, there is no monochrome monitor to match. Much digital photography relies on the transmissive medium of LCDs which are three-color arrays. Would monochrome digital images look nicer on an LCD designed without a color matrix filter layer? Or would it make no difference?"
Phil: "I've been following Alan Schaller on social media for a while. Sometimes I think there's a bit too much stark black and stark white in his photos but that's just me being a bit arm-chair critical because holy cow man, yeah, he's good. There's no point me quibbling about that. His backlit, partially-silhouetted figures, like the boys under the umbrella (carousel #12, I think) is quite delightful."
Pak Ming Wan: "I own one of these Leica M Monochroms (the typ 246 used by Alan Schaller), my first monochrome digital camera. I'm lucky enough to have found it mint secondhand with about 1,500 shutter actuations, at a relatively cheap 3,500 Euro or so. It was still a mind-bogglingly large sum of money for a camera to feed my personal hobby (and I still feel ridiculous and somewhat embarrassed writing that previous sentence).
"There are a couple of differences that I now appreciate about this:
- Chimping in black and white: Immediate feedback in black and white on the image is a pretty amazing experience.
- Better sensitivity, means a simplified manual experience (particularly in low light): You can use aperture priority during the day and manual w. auto ISO at night, which makes shooting very reactive.
- Simplified, efficient workflow: Lightroom takes in the monochrome DNGs and post is vastly simplified compared to color to black and white conversion. There's no more saturation, spectral level adjustment, white balance...you adjust your levels and do localized contrast/exposure adjustments and you're good to go. Colour calibration of the monitor is less critical and changing colour temperature is more meaningful in black and white.
- Per pixel sharpness and other technical image qualities: The technical image quality is outstanding in daylight, at night it is noticeably better than what I was used to on other Bayer sensors. At high ISO, there is noise. Is it film-like? I'm not entirely convinced. Did I mention that there's also the risk of banding sometimes at high ISO? Ugh.
"Was the above worth it? Probably. But I'm still embarrassed about how much it was."
F. Hall: "I can relate to this when it comes to focus. If a lens is autofocus I have a resistance to using it in manual focus but have no trouble with my manual focus lenses. That may be different because autofocus lenses are not set up to manual focus very well. I find that manual focus is often faster for me when you take the whole process into account. I don't have to select a focus point, decide if I should turn on face recognition, etc. Just focus and release the shutter. Sometimes I would like auto aperture stop down though. With no choice you have one less decision to make. No second thoughts about would this work better in colour."
Ricardo Hernandez: "Having a color camera that gives the option to set it to B&W is not the same as having an all-out raw-capturing Monochrom camera—and this is not talking about the benefits of better resolution, better DR, better ISO. Simply put, a B&W-only camera doesn't give you the option of color—ever. You don't have it by mistake, you don't have it by choice, and when things get real tough you either make the B&W work or not. You have no other option. It's precisely having the no other option under any circumstances that can push you to learn the skills to get a B&W right, and get your B&W photography to a new level."
Mike replies: 'Zackly. You get it.
I've demoed the first two generations of the Leica Monocroms several times and just could not get along with them.
I get this "plastic chrome" feeling with many of the results from the camera. Also, the highlights don't roll off - they clip harshly. Very unlike film. I've found that my digital color cameras handle highlight roll off much better due to three different channels clipping at different levels.
I just stocked up on another 60 rolls of Tri-X for my M6. Film is a pain in the ass, but I love the look. Also, It doesn't hurt that my M6's value has doubled in the last 2 years while the M246s out there have halved.
Posted by: George Feucht | Monday, 07 December 2020 at 03:29 PM