Sample Album on Flickr

Getting tired of B&W yet? Wish I'd get back to writing about pool? It's funny, Kirk Tuck sometimes goes off topic, and I sometimes go off topic. But we're completely different...I go on about pool and he goes on about pools.

Anyway, this morning I've uploaded a small album of sample pictures taken with the Sigma FP Mono and Sigma 45mm ƒ/2.8 I-Series lens.

It's important to mention that these are just my very first trials with a monochrome camera; I've never tried one before. These are the results of the first two days spending a few hours each day trying out this camera. I consider myself very far down the learning curve and am only starting to feel my way toward knowing how to use the camera and edit these files. I'm very far from an expert. My purpose here is to see, eventually, if I think B&W from a monochrome sensor can compete with conversions from conventional color files, which I have more experience with, and with darkroom prints from film negatives.

I'll add more examples as I take more. The loaner Leica Monochrom and Leica 50mm Summilux ASPH arrived yesterday, courtesy of Chris, so the next journey is going to be to make some comparison photographs with the two FF monochrome cameras to see what we can see.

Thanks again to Chris and Jason for kindly loaning me their cameras to try.

Mike

UPDATE: Turns out Flickr has promoted one of my test pics on its "Explore" feature for the last couple of days. That has resulted in it getting 4,509 views (over twice as many as others in the set), seven comments, and 72 "Favorites."

Book o' the Week

Chromes is an edit of more than 5,000 Kodachromes and Ektachromes taken from 10 chronologically ordered binders found in a safe in the Eggleston Artistic Trust. This archive was once used by John Szarkowski, who selected the 48 images printed in Eggleston’s seminal book William Eggleston’s Guide, while the rest of the archive has remained almost entirely unpublished. Three volumes, slipcased.

These book links are your portal to Amazon. Please use our links; they help support the site.

Go to B&H Photo

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.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Jim Arthur: "I have never been a B&W guy but these pictures are impressive. Jason’s converted camera produces files that remind me of what I see on Shorpy. I would love to see a print of one of these files. I bet it would also be impressive.

"Thanks for posting your findings, Mike. I am always interested in the capabilities of custom tools that can’t be purchased at the corner big-box store. We have all read the reviews of the latest bleeding edge offering from the multinational camera companies, and while their offerings are impressive…they tend to move as a pack and homogenize the tool. I feel the same way about cell phones. Their computational photography is impressive but if everyone on the planet uses the same algorithm to take a photo, all photos begin to look the same."

Don Cox: "I've been using an FP for a couple of years. I bought it mainly for use with my lenses from film SLRs, and it works very well. Converting a raw file to B&W on the computer works well, so I see no need for a physical conversion. If I want to use flash I use a different camera. Recommended for experienced photographers who want a well built practical tool. As you say, a bit like a classic Hasselblad, but much more reliable because there are no moving parts (except the control wheels). The cable release is particularly good. Try it with a 105mm Nikkor if you have one—adapter costs peanuts. DPReview doesn't like Sigma cameras, but there's a good Sigma forum on the DPReview site."

Mike Ferron (partial comment): "I am looking at your Sigma samples and they do look good. Personally I have decided to devote myself to B&W film. There is just something about the look. I also have my little darkroom up and running again, printing 6x6 medium-format images on fiber matte. I also picked up an 8x10" field camera for not too much money. At about $7 per shot I have decided to shoot one image a week with this rig and contact print. This aging guy has young enthusiasm for the project."

Chico Ruger (partial comment): "My two cents: The photos seem unremarkable. I’m not referring to the creative aspects of the shots, just the B&W visual attributes. I feel converted color files done with a modicum of skill would produce images of at least comparable impact...I don’t see significant output advantages that would lead me to a monochrome-only sensor."

robert e: "Whew. If my camera had that much resolution I would think about leaving the longer lens at home."

Richard Parkin: "The EXIF says 'Flash (on, fired)' on all I’ve looked at. Seems unlikely."

Mike replies: I can't figure out why it says that. Flash is "Off" in the menus. And there's no hot shoe and obviously I'm not using any flash. I also don't think there is anything connected to wherever an outboard flash would be connected. So I'm at a loss. Some kind of bug I guess.

Dave: "Is it me, or do the photos of your yard look like they've been sharpened? Either that or that lens is really, really sharp!

"Those clouds sure turned out nicely! Very good contrast with the yellow filter.

"Thanks for posting all those photos."

Mike replies: Yes, the yard pictures were sharpened, especially "Butters on Alert." I wasn't planning on posting them to Flickr when I processed them. I'm still not sure exactly how best to process files for posting on Flickr, but I assume I'll get there with practice...same as with the processing of these files in general: I know I'll get better at it if I keep working at it. You almost can't help it.

Five or six months ago I decided I was going to learn position play in pool. (I'm a good shooter and usually I enjoy just shooting my way out of trouble, without paying too much attention to pattern play.) I started working on it, and at first I was almost comically bad at it. Just didn't know where the cue ball was going to go. But I just settled in to keep trying, and gradually I've learned specific shots, done speed drills, watched for clues in professional matches on YouTube, and practiced, practiced, practiced. Now I'm actually getting kinda good at it. I'd say I still have a lot to learn, and partly my progress is blocked by deficiencies in motor skills and coordination—execution and consistency—but I'm doing way better than when I started.

You just have to keep after things if you want to get better. If I keep processing monochrome files I'll keep learning about how to do it.

Rob Campbell: "Basically, all such attempts to show or prove concepts such as the one we have here regarding mono or colour sensors, are meaningless online. Only if you can show a set of comparison prints of the very same subject, shot at the same time, can anything close to a valid judgement be pronounced. Sadly, even that inescapably reduces down to the capability of the person making the prints. For what it’s worth, I guess one’s better off having a camera that doesn't restrict your choices. Anyway, until Leica came along in its alternative universe spaceship, nobody ever shed a tear over the matter. Indeed, one of the best things about digital was precisely that you got all the choices wrapped up in the equivalent of a single roll of film. Not a lot has happened, really, to change that situation."

Kirk replies to Rob: "Re 'Anyway, until Leica came along in its alternative universe spaceship, nobody ever shed a tear over the matter.' This implies that Leica was the first to come to market with a monochrome camera which is not at all true. Kodak DCS 200 cameras were available in both monochrome versions and IR versions. There was a DCS420M version and also a six-megapixel APS-H DCS 760 monochrome version which was extremely well regarded. Over at Contax the original Contax N1 which was the first full frame six megapixel DSLR was reportedly available in very limited quantities in a monochrome configuration but the line was discontinued within a year of launch. The later Kodaks were coveted by photographers dedicated to black-and-white imaging and are still sought after today. Leica was third in line, at best, in the investigation of digital monochrome-only cameras. Just setting the record straight. And yes, a number of very expert practitioners shed tears about the discontinuation of both Contax and Kodak dedicated black-and-white models."

Comments

[Ray Foxlee]

Mike, your link to Flickr is not working, I'm afraid. There is 404 error message.

[Sorry about that! I made the pictures public and found the correct link at 4:30 in the morning Eastern Time. Hopefully it will work for everyone now. You might have to refresh your browser page.

Several others told me about this too but I haven't published all the comments to this effect. Thanks to all, though. --Mike]

[rfeg]

Hi Mike,
It’s working, relax.
Kirk also loves his Sigma fp…
It will be interesting comparing Leica with Sigma.
For the “perfect camera” i.e. the one that we enjoy the much taking photographs, we also have to adapt to the camera and not only the camera having all the specs that we want. Kind of a happy long lasting marriage.
Cheers, rfeg

[Stelios]

I'll add more as I take more, but the Leica Monochrom and Leica 50mm Summilux ASPH arrived yesterday, courtesy of Chris, so the next journey is going to be to make some comparison photographs with the two FF monochrome cameras to see what we can see.

Aren't we (and you) in for a treat with all those cameras!

[Robert Roaldi]

To answer your question, no, I'm not getting tired of B&W talk.

[Richard Parkin]

Link working fine now at 1212h GMT.

[Chris H]

Very nice. Thanks for the comment on workflow on the Sigma - that does not sound too onerous at all. I've used the Foveon sensor DP3 Merrill cameras and really liked them, but not the software and workflow (at least when they were new; I don't know current state).

That's part of why I use the Leica Monochrom - the interfaces are what I'm used to, both hardware and software. That might be a bit of a crutch in some ways.

[John Krumm]

Good to see you on Flickr. It's an interesting place with lots of odd groups. If I find someone I really like, I will go through their follow list for gems. I know many serious photographers are on Instagram for the reach (like David Hurn) but I prefer the size options of Flickr.

[Bruce Bordner]

My first impression is that I'm seeing a film "grain" look which may be some oversharpening or is it the 24MP? A higher MP may be smoother but in a way this is pleasing as it looks more film-like. I'm not complaining, just curious (from a distance - let's see what happens to you). BTW, seeing that Sigma mess immediately made my fingers twitchy...

[James Kofron]

You got a nice cloud day! And some rain to boot!!

[Rob de Loe]

I notice your strong affinity for beach chickens. ;)

[Mark]

Does the converted sensor respond to filters like b/w film does? Or is it all done post?

[I will post some comparisons at some point if I can. --Mike]

[Mike Ferron]

I did not realize Flickr supported photo uploads that large. I cannot do justice to a on screen image @ 800 wide. Too much lost detail. The 4k screen on my iMac needs a larger image. Slightly off topic but I am looking at your Sigma samples (post below) and they do look good. Personally I have decided to devote myself to B&W film. There is just something about the look. I also have my little dark room up and running again printing 6x6 MF images on fiber matte. I also picked up an 8x 10 field camera for not too much money. @ about $7 per shot I have decided to shoot one image a week with this rig and contact print. This aging guy has young enthusiasm for the project.

[Rob Campbell]

Unfortunately, flickr wants me to reveal my soul before I can access the photographs. What a shame they must remain unseen.

Am I alone in resenting this constant marketing surveillance by the digital capitalists of this crummy planet? As a result, I instinctively switch away every time their questionnaires surface.

Other capitalists, including myself (in most minor of keys), don’t really have this fixation with sticking the nose into the darkest recesses of the visitor’s person. I resent such digging, deeply (and any pun is accidental).

[William Lewis]

Love the mallard and heron. Nice capture of them and a good crop too. Thanks!

[Chico Ruger]

FWIW…My 2 cents: The photos seem unremarkable. I’m not referring to the creative aspects of the shots, just the B/W visual attributes. I feel converted color files done with a modicum of skill would produce images of at least comparable impact.

I realize you are seeking something other than “better” B/W, i.e., a B/W-only esthetic during shooting. Fair enough, but I don’t see significant output advantages that would lead me to a monochrome-only sensor.

[Kenneth Tanaka]

Note: Anyone enchanted by this kit can rent an unmodified stock kit nearly like it from Lensrentals.

[Yoram Nevo]

A lean, mean cloud machine

[Dan Khong]

I like the clouds in your pictures. But I didn't think the new Sigma toy made them any better. They were perfect to start with.

[Robin P]

I'll admit that I only had a quick look but the first thing that struck me was the missing colour! None of the photos were the kind of subjects that suit B&W... sorry, just my two centimes worth :-)

[scott kirkpatrick]

Whatta lotta views! Can you upload them in full 24 MPx glory to Flickr so that we can compare your two mono cameras at their best? The tractor did reveal impressive detail when I clicked twice.

[Dave Millier]

Can I recommend these B&W portraits by Jones Hendershot: https://joneshendershot.com/project/portraits/

I'm not sure how they are done (stitching?) but they have a large format look to them.

[I love those. They do look like digital to me, but very well done. The technique is not "in the way" at all, which is always what's wanted. Thanks! --Mike]

[Peter Komar]

To all, I visited Jones Hendershot on FLICKR, it appears that many of the B&W images were shot using a NIKON Z. They are really nice images and demonstrates a color sensor can produce excellent B&W images.

[schralp]

Is this an emperor’s clothes thing…? Maybe shoot the same scene in b&w with your Fuji for comparison…? Perhaps there’s a nuance I’m missing?

[Alan]

I don't know what is so creative about the b/w images you tout as [only] available on a camera dedicated to b/w. [I did no such thing. I very explicitly have said the opposite of that, numerous times. —Mike] I must regretfully inform you that most of my b/w images are jpgs from the images my Sony makes when I set the camera to capture b/w and raw together and they seem superior to many [most] of the ones I see on various sites. Just my sentiment regarding your consideration of dedicated b/w camera. And I have many samples to reveal if and when....

[We discussed this in great depth and detail in the past week or so.

https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2022/08/same-old-problems.html

If you don't feel the same way that's perfectly understandable; many people don't. --Mike]

[David Keenan]

I own an fp. It's Achilles heel is auto-focus. This is pretty well known in Sigma circles. Some reviewers go so far as to say that it is nearly useless. Manually focus or zone focus -- if you must auto-focus don't expect much, even then you may be disappointed as I was. Otherwise, a very cool and capable camera.

[John Camp]

Tell the truth -- you epoxied Butter's tail to the deck.

Despite my skepticism about the need for converted cameras, I'll have to say I'm impressed, and furthermore, it's convinced me to start doing some B&W work.(And to take some of that back, I'd say you could do as well with the in-camera B&W setting on a color digital camera, although, of course, that wouldn't fix your mind-set.) I'll be doing my work with the in-camera conversion from color.

[It might well be that that's the better way to go as far as results are concerned. Really what I'm trying to find out here is whether a dedicated B&W-only camera can produce results as good as those from color files converted in software. I did not epoxy anything on Butters. --Mike]

[DB]

[OT] Xander's picture just showed up in my LinkedIn update feed, via The New Yorker.
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/the-new-yorker_my-son-was-12-or-13-when-he-announced-that-activity-6967252211538006016-jI_q

[Thanks for telling me! --Mike]

[Bear.]

Responding to the some of the skepticism and a comment about negative reviews of Sigma cameras, DP Review and many other reviews online plainly have an inherent bias in favour of 'do it all' cameras. Thus, for example, that a Leica M rangefinder does not autofocus is considered to be some sort of flaw, or negative; whereas in reality, of course, that the camera manually focusses only is the whole point. The same is true of many reviews of Sigma cameras. Sigma tends to produce quirky, targeted cameras which are very good at one or two things to the exclusion of almost everything else. Those exclusions are, I presume, deliberate. In any event, presumably purchasers wanted cameras that do anything otherwise than what they want will not buy one. But that is hardly a negative. Why buy a truck if you want it to drive like a sports car? I have 5 Fovean sensor cameras: the original DP1 and DP2, and the originals DP Merrills: 1, 2 and 3. All are teeny-weeny (albeit at the price of poor battery life) and make beautiful images within their limitations (e.g. good light and low ISO). All are - well - pretty crap outside those limitations. But I didn't buy them to use them otherwise than within their limitations. All of which is a roundabout way of saying that a Sigma FP - let alone a monochrome modified version - seems a bit too specialised in areas that do not suit the way I shoot. Not a criticism, or a problem, just not a camera for which I have a use. Horses for courses. Glad you're enjoying yours and taking interesting images ... which I believe to be the only point of the whole exercise.

[Rob Campbell]

Basically, all such attempts to show or prove concepts such as the one we have here regarding mono or colour sensors, are meaningless online. Only if you can show a set of comparison prints of the very same subject, shot at the same time, can anything close to a valid judgement be pronounced. Sadly, even that inescapably reduces down to the capability of the person making the prints.

For what it’s worth, I guess one’s better off having a camera that doesn't restrict your choices. Anyway, until Leica came along in its alternative universe spaceship, nobody ever shed a tear over the matter. Indeed, one of the best things about digital was precisely that you got all the choices wrapped up in the equivalent of a single roll of film. Not a lot has happened, really, to change that situation.

["Nobody ever shed a tear over the matter"—very wrong! --Mike, shedder of tears for ye B&W of yore]

[Herman Krieger]

Your monochrome samples resemble what I get with film developed in D-23.

[Roger Bradbury]

I think you should get together with Kirk Tuck and write off-topic posts about the new sport I've just invented: Water Pool.

It's very similar to Water Polo but there are more balls; even the name is nearly the same! : ]

[Rob Campbell]

For Kirk: indeed, Leica wasn’t first, but then at the risk of digging a hole deeper than it need be, nobody seems to go online and weep tears of sorrow for those other marques. If anything, they are down in the dusty vault with the Exakta, the Brownie et al. Leica, on the other hand, took the concept and made it their own.

Leica has the benefit of a very sophisticated PR machine, much of it manned freely by its fan club membership. Alternatively, I may simply not frequent those sites where the others are mourned…

To make it clear: I am one of those who resisted digital for as long as it was economically possible so to do; I’d be fibbing if I pretended to be an early fan, and early prices for useful digital cameras made sure it stayed that way. Fortunately, I’d pretty much retired by then and it no longer mattered very much.

[Rob Campbell]

For Mike: you’re misreading me: I am not writing about wet photography there - my remark is aimed at the situation regarding the choice of colour or mono sensors. I have no doubt at all that my own wet prints were far better to look at, usually on Kodak’s WSG, well glazed, than anything I ever made digitally. No argument from me on that point at all.

[ChrisC]

Update
Looks like you have started a trend - Flickrs “Explore” page for 24 Aug is all black & white.