Monochrome Sensor versus Color Files Converted

Unless you frequent the Pentax Forums, you might not have seen this link. TOP reader Chris Feola emailed it to me the other day:

Your musings as you decided on your monochrome camera helped me decide to take the leap and buy a Pentax Monochrome when they were released last year.

I was so blown away by the quality of the Monochrome; it's really like a different type of photography. But all over the internet there have been so many questions about how much of an improvement the Monochrome is over, say, black-and-white conversions from the K-3 III. So, being an old reporter dude, I decided to dig into it.

Here's the bottom line: I interviewed the Monochrome engineering team, and they said: 'At high sensitivity, the image quality from a monochrome sensor should be higher than an image obtained with the regular model using Pixel Shift.'

Wow.

I ended up writing it all up for Pentax Forums.

He's an excellent writer and has original things to say*.

Bliss in B&W
My own experience leads to three conclusions:

One: a converted sensor is inherently sharper than a converted color file. The difference is not earth-shaking or world-beating, and it won't take your breath away, but it is kind of addictive. I'm not even a "sharpness guy" and yet I have to say I'm very taken with it. The detail is very clean as well. My 24-MP sensor gives about the same sharpness as converted Nikon D800 files—maybe even a little better—so my sense is that the converted sensor gives the same visual impression as a bayer-array sensor with 1.5X as many pixels.

Two: The conversion makes the sensor more light-sensitive. Not much, but noticeably. And probably measurably, although I have not attempted to measure it.

Three: Higher ISOs are much easier to work with, making sensors with no Bayer array much superior to converted color files if you often shoot in very low light. Chris talks about this in his article.

I strongly suspect that a Pentax Monochrome, which has a 25.7-MP APS-C sensor, will be absolutely all you need for extremely pleasing monochrome files. In fact it's probably overkill. But read Chris's article.

Of course the biggest advantage for me is that I visualize better in black-and-white when that's all the camera sees. Some people do not experience this, but it's emphatically true for me. I missed that for many years, ever since my cameras contained Tri-X, and I noticed the improvement again almost from Day One when I started using the converted sensor.

Here's that quote from Chris's article:

PentaxForums conducted an email interview with Pentax parent Ricoh Imaging, who translated our questions into Japanese, routed them to the appropriate executives, and then translated their answers into English for this article.

[...]

They said even they were surprised by the Monochrome's image quality, especially at ISO 100,000 or higher. 'Resized images do not fail even at ISO 1,600,000,' they said. 'At high sensitivity, the image quality from a monochrome sensor should be higher than an image obtained with the regular model using Pixel Shift.'

B&W from color files
Does this mean that you can't do good work converting files from monochrome? Absolutely not. I've done that very successfully, and remember that sharpness never made a bad picture good. And there's one big advantage of converting from color: you can apply virtual filter effects in post-processing for a wide variety of tonal adjustments. If you're very sensitive to tonal relationships, you might find that this is the overriding consideration for you. But you'd also have to have a pretty sophisticated knowledge of color filtration effects, or you might either a.) get lost amongst all the possibilities, or b.) find yourself creating pictures one-by-one that aren't cohesive in terms of their tonal "signature" or overall look.

B&W has a much broader range of interpretive and expressive possibilities than color; in the old days you picked the film, developer and paper that suited the look you liked, and they stayed constant from picture to picture and project to project. Having more freedom in digital means you have to have a better sense of maintaining that consistency intentionally.

Good work can be done in B&W using either approach, but I'd suggest not dismissing the idea of a dedicated B&W sensor cameras until you've tried one.

Mike

* ...Unlike most of the internet which even has a dumb-repetition bot, known as AI, to help it churn out dumb repetitive things literally mindlessly. I got my first AI-written comment the other day, or at least I suspect it was. Maybe it's me, but I don't think civilization is making progress.

Original contents copyright 2024 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 or on the title of this post.)

Featured Comments from:

MikeR: "From actual experience using a monochrome-only camera, and then making a print on a monochrome-only printer, I must say, 'Don't knock it until you've tried it.' The only thing I use my Huawei P20 Pro phone for is its terrific Leica-engineered monochrome camera. Otherwise, it's always in airplane mode, with any connectivity shut off. Why Huawei P20? Because I'm retired, and don't have a lot of money to throw around for a Leica 'Monochrom,' or a converted Sigma. I just recently converted an Epson Stylus Pro 3880 printer to a carbon-based inkset. The prints I'm able to get from it, using the images from the P20 Pro, are jaw-dropping."

Comments

[Mark B]

The traditional black & white filters — yellow, orange, yellow-green — do they have the same effect on a monochrome digital sensor image as they have on film?

[Nelson]

I've been searching the net looking for articles that compare converted cameras (like your Sigma) to the Pentax... can't find anything.

It would be great if you could use a Pentax alongside your Sigma and compare them. Any users out there who would let Mike borrow your K3 Monochrome?

I've been considering buying a Sony a7C and having it converted, but am not keen on Sony products in general. I like the idea of full frame for my lenses, which are mostly older m-mount. I'm also not keen on the design of the Pentax; it is just not compact enough for me.
What to do... what to buy...

[Dan Khong]

If I program the camera to shoot on monochrome at the point of capturing images, is it the same as shooting in colour first and then desaturating (converting to B&W) the images later?

But of course, shooting on B&W film and then scanning the negatives into digital is the poor man's way of achieving digital monochrome.

[Stephen S.]

“At high sensitivity, the image quality from a monochrome sensor should be higher than an image obtained with the regular model using Pixel Shift.”

That sounds great, but it's virtually useless. Pixel Shift photos take time to capture, so for the best results, you're shooting static subjects while the camera is on a tripod, where you might as well use low sensitivity. I'd say that a high-sensitivity Pixel Shift image is an oxymoron.

I'm also assuming that the comparison was only made with how Pentax implements Pixel Shift, which is only four images with the sensor shifted in whole-pixel increments, as opposed to say, Olympus, where their High Res mode captures eight images, with the sensor shifted in both whole- and half-pixel increments.

[Ian Scholey]

Reads like the same debate / discussion that was had with respect to Leica color vs Monochrom sensors with an identical conclusion.

My own experience adds that it is easier to simulate the effect of a color filter when starting with a RGB sensor than a Monochrom sensor but again that shouldn't be surprising because the RGB sensor has captured a wider set of wavelengths than a Monochrom sensor

[Michael Fewster]

My guess is that you need to be looking at prints and probably largish prints at that to see the gains of a monochrome sensor.
Re the high iso advantages. Are these comparisons straight out of the camera or are they made with Bayer images that have been subsequently put through the latest noise reduction programs? Those programs make quite a difference.

[Andrew C]

Chris's article finally explained it well for me. The directness of the monochrome sensor seems somehow primal and more like film, just in digital form (and much, much more capability). What he had to say about using OLED monitors is intriguing.

[JOHN B GILLOOLY]

As a Sony shooter currently using A1 and A93, I would purchase a Sony Monochrome in a second.

[Mike Plews]

How about a monochrome camera with film simulation modes? Tri-X, Panatomic-X, Verichrome Pan pick your favorite. Just a thought.
Like most photographers I do both color and B&W but my heart is with monochrome.

[Bear.]

I find the ability to retrospectively change colour filters for monochrome work converted from colour sensors to be worth the price of having Bayer (or Fovean) filters, so haven't gone monochrome even though my film days were entirely black and white. (And I notice that, for some reason I don't understand, I always refer to monochrome digital but black and white film- or is that just me?)

[Jayanand Govindaraj]

Why don't you compare the monochrome sensor with a colour sensor that does not have an anti aliasing filter in front of it? Say, a D800E instead of a D800? Would that not be a better comparison, given the number of camera body options available nowadays without the AA filter? In reality, IMHO, the output from the Pentax K3 Mk III monochrome needs to be superior to the converted output of a Nikon Z8/Nikon D850 or the Sony/Canon equivalents to be worth it, given the flexibility the latter cameras offer. After all, it is not an inexpensive hobbyist offering, it costs US$2K+. Otherwise, once we agree that cameras are merely tools, why should anyone not aspiring to be a fine art photographer ever consider one?

[Gary]

The article you linked to quotes Pentax people saying that the monochrome IQ exceeds the IQ of color images converted to B&W at extremely high ISOs. I don't shoot at those nose-bleed ISOs. I'm left wondering whether there is any advantage to shooting the monochrome at normal ISOs.

[Bob Johnston]

Of course, in theory at least, a dedicated mono sensor will be 'better' than a colour one. But what does 'better' mean?

Personally the ability to switch between colour and monochrome without having to carry two cameras and the easy use of colour filtration are two important factors. If I want to see in black and white I can switch to that mode.

Asking the actual Pentax engineers why their camera is so good. This is not serious is it? A good third party review would be of interest.

[Andrea]

Funny, I suspect that the AI-generated comment might have been mine (didn't see it appearing but just thought it had been lost or who knows). It might be because I'm not a native speaker, wrote it quickly and didn't really read it twice... if it really was that one, I would be very amused (I don't have a very high opinion of AI either, and would accept the shame of being mistaken for an AI as a sad, but fair, sign of the times). Or, maybe, I really just did not press the button the right way.

[David Brown]

I have been doing more work lately converting digital files to monochrome. I do this because (as you said) I can simulate filter effects. I am also learning that I must not over do it!

[John Camp]

I have both a Nikon Z7 and a Pentax Monochrome and I *think* (I'm not sure) that I can *feel* a difference between native B&W and converted color, even on a monitor (the Apple monitor that is paired with a Studio.) Feel it, but not really see it. I think you have to be a bit of a fanatic to care about the difference. I don't know about very large prints, and I don't really shoot above 6400, and not even 6400 if there's any possible way to avoid it. As far as I'm concerned, B&W vs. conversion is a bit of a "angels dancing on the head of a pin" question, with little practical relevance, except, possibly, at the extremes.

I have somewhat come to understand Mike's attitude toward shooting with a B&W-only camera. When I take the Pentax out, I'm hunting for a certain kind of image and some that I would shoot with the Z7, I would not bother with when carrying the Pentax.

Also, Nelson (above) said that he was not keen on the design of the Pentax. After using it for a while, neither am I.

[William Cook]

I agree with the tenor and scope of your assessment. My camera has an unconverted, native B&W sensor. Yes, high ISOs produce great images, but even at normal ISOs, there seems to be a recognizable difference, though ever so slight. For me, the real significant difference is (as you said) seeing in B&W directly, and using old fashioned colored filters again. While a polarizing filter is applicable to color as well as B&W sensor cameras, shooting with color filters to achieve a certain effect is still magical to me. Converting a color image to B&W was problematic to me because of the overwhelming amount of choices with the color sliders in Photoshop—for those that love that process, there may be no incentive to shoot in B&W natively. With add on filters, you get one effect and you make that decision before you press the shutter. Responding to an earlier comment regarding color filters, yes, they do produce results like they did with B&W film. Except, and It could be just my camera, the yellow filter seems to have negligible effect—to my eye, I see no difference. To get the effect of a yellow filter on film, I have to bump up to a light orange filter. Red still produces dramatic skies but perhaps slightly less dramatic than the result would be on film. Again, this could be peculiar to just my sensor.

[JOHN B GILLOOLY]

One of the comments in the "ideas" post referred to printing BW with a carbon black ink-set. I would be very interested in hearing more about that. Especially since we are discussing a monochrome, it would be interesting to see a fully monochrome workflow.

[Steve Deutsch]

To this point:
"Of course the biggest advantage for me is that I visualize better in black-and-white when that's all the camera sees. Some people do not experience this, but it's emphatically true for me. I missed that for many years, ever since my cameras contained Tri-X,"

I remember using tri-x (give me plus-x, please) and my view finder was in color. How did you get a camera that didn't show you color too

[For me it doesn't matter at all what the viewfinder shows. It matters what my mind knows. And in any event, I was always looking through the viewfinder and also through a yellow filter! --Mike]

[Gary Nylander]

 I love black and white photography. I'm tempted to get my Nikon D810 converted to a monochrome sensor but I'm not sure if it's possible or who does these conversions. It would be interesting to see the difference when photographing with a black-and-white-only sensor camera. Currently, I'm using a Nikon D850 as my main camera, I convert the colour files to black and white.

There was a time when I used to shoot black-and-white film exclusively with large format film (I still like to shoot B&W film from time to time) partly because it was something I could do at home, from processing the film to printing in my home darkroom, at one time it was relatively easy to obtain the chemicals and film/paper because most local photo shops carried the supplies. I tried shooting colour slide film(Velvia) with my 8x10 camera back in 1994 and I recall it cost me about $17 (CDN) per shot, that was including the price of the film and sending it off for processing in Vancouver, B.C., that was very costly back then! it must be very expensive today. I had no interest in setting up my own home-based colour-processing lab. I much preferred the simplicity of doing my black-and-white film processing at home as it was far cheaper and it was what I could afford to do on my time off from my day-to-day work as a staff photographer for the Kelowna Courier newspaper.

One of the things that I learned from shooting black and white film is that I learned to "see" in my mind's eye what would make a good black-and-white image. I think I got pretty good at it (I think others are far more accomplished than me) I still use those lessons when out shooting with my digital camera, but I admit that sometimes I do get sidetracked with colour possibilities, but then there have been times when there are not a lot of great black and white images possible, sometimes when shooting landscapes. Now I am finding that I do like the option of having a colour image if that's what the scene calls for, sometimes it works both ways, the picture works well in colour and black and white. So with that in mind, I guess having a digital camera that records in colour but the resulting images can be converted to black and white is a good thing at least for me, others will find it not so pleasing. But still, I would be curious to see what it's like to photograph with a digital camera equipped with a black-and-white sensor.

[I had mine done by Daniel Morrison at Monochrome Imaging Services. The D810 is not on Daniel's current price list of cameras he converts, but he can evaluate cameras for conversion as long as they have Sony sensors, which the D810 does. Check his website for the details. monochromeimaging.com --Mike]

[Kye Wood]

All these technical comments and links to technical articles entirely miss the point.

Using a dedicated black and white digital camera is fun. End of.

Looking for a reason to justify it on technical merit is just gear acquisition syndrome looking for justification on spurious grounds.

If you shoot colour, having a luminous blended layer in Photoshop as a default action gives a glorious black and white image without any user intervention required. Which is the good enough avoiding the enemy of the pointless pursuit of perfection.

[Oren Grad]

For Gary Nylander: MaxMax (https://maxmax.com/) does Nikon DSLR monochrome conversions among many other types, but it won't be cheap.

[MikeR]

@GaryNylander
Suggest looking into https://maxmax.com/

They seem to have the capability of modifying a variety of camera brands.

No personal experience. I had my last two infrared conversions done elsewhere.

[David Dyer-Bennet]

Using a dedicated B&W camera is an experience unique to the digital era. May all those who wish to, enjoy it to the full!

One of the first things I did when I owned 2 bodies was put color film in one and B&W in the other. Because I had strong ideas about which I wanted for certain photos, and sometimes (particularly when traveling) waiting for the current roll to run out was not practical.

[Chris Feola]

Gary said: " I'm left wondering whether there is any advantage to shooting the monochrome at normal ISOs."
Yes; an enormous one. Ansel Adams wrote that the negative is the musical score, and the print is the performance. Shooting the Monochrome has brought me back to that in ways I haven't seen since my darkroom days because the extended sensitivity means there is ENDLESS detail in the shadows and dark areas of the image. I find myself exploring and working images in ways I haven't done for years, working with all that imagery.

[Andy F]

I concur with MikeR about the Huawei P20 Pro phone, it has a great 20MP Sony monochrome sensor, Leica designed lens & Leica jpeg engine, dare I say its a Leica Q2M but in a phone & can be bought s/h for under £200.