Certainly your points are valid because that's what's important to you. Likewise, there seem to be a pretty dedicated set of photographers shooting rangefinders and B&W only who may have similar feelings, but opposite, to yours about color vs. B&W. Clearly Leica is not looking to appeal to the majority with such a camera. And while it would be a minority interest, these photographers seem to be, in some respects, the epitome of the rangefinder philosophy. Therefore it makes a lot of sense for Leica to dedicate a specialized camera to their needs/desires.
And it buys them another few months until Photokina for the M10 'for the masses.'
Maxmax does B&W conversions. They aren't cheap ... but they are probably more cost effective than a platform change to Leica would be. I forget my dialogue with regarding the technical detail @ the gains, but if you arre truly interested in a B&W only body (non-Leica) ... something worth checking into.
I was hoping to convert my 5Dc to B&W, but he doesn't do existing conversions ... only new bodies, iirc.
millsart wrote:
Interesting way to look at it, but for me, going out with one lens usually doesn't feel like that big of limitation. After all, I can always try to move closer, or do things like take a pano if I can't get wide enough.
By contrast, shooting only b&w seems like it would really limit so much of the world I see before my eyes. I do love b&w photography, and perhaps convert as much as 50% of my images, but like many people I would guess, I also really love and respond to color. The red's, oranges and purples of a Southwestern sunset. The beautiful blue hue's of the Caribbean Sea. The explosion of color of a field of wildflowers in the spring. The lush hues of green in an old growth forest.......
I could go to the Cayman Islands with a single lens, say a 35mm and capture a ton of great photos and really not feel limited at all. Granted being able to stitch files if I did want a sweeping shot of a beach or port is a nice digital option.
Being on that same island with a B&W only camera..... I don't know..... While there would be some cool shots, and some fun in trying to explore more about the darkness and light, I can't feel I'd really feel I was missing out when I got home with no color images and no way to turn them into color.
I hear ya. It would be tough for me to spend so much money on a b&w only camera. That being said, I usually try to shoot B&W with only B&W in mind, since scene considerations for color photography are so much different, so, if I had the money, it would be fun to run a regular and B&W M9 side by side, but I'll stick with my cheapie cameras. I'm waiting to spend that kind of money on a full-size, 6x6 digital back for my Hasselblads, if it ever comes at a non-stratospheric price.
wayne seltzer wrote:
Yes, this is what I want in a low-light street shooting camera.
I was hoping Sony would do this with the NEX 7B, as I don't want to pay $7K for a B&W only camera.
Would not have to worry about corner color fixing when using wide angle RF lenses, right?
You wouldn't have to worry about the color cast, but it would still likely be evident as a tonal variation, something that shooting with color filters would likely make worse.
edwardkaraa wrote:
No Bayer interpolation means true pixel count. We all know that true resolution is much lower than the actual pixel count, if I remember correctly it's about half (I could be wrong on this one).
Bayer interpolation is on the color channels only. You have true luminosity/lightness values from every pixel.
Makten wrote:
~2 stops more light per pixel. That's a lot.
Hmm, yes, but still no. I don't think many would give up color for 2 stops better high ISO performance - especially since you've already get about the same performance and color with the latest generation of sensors (i.e Canon 5DIII & Nikon D800 and whatnot compared to the M9). If they are going to make it an M9-X, it's very likely going to have the same M9 Kodak sensor. It's a fabulous low-ISO sensor but once you get above ISO 1600 it's less than impressive. Making it capable of half-decent ISO 6400 puts it at the level of a 5DIII, but without color. So if your objective is high ISO image quality, a current gen DSLR seems like a better choice as you get it in color.
I don't know, it seems kind of a silly idea altogether. I'm sure it will sell just fine, being Leica On the plus side the new owners can buy cheaper non-APO lenses as CA won't really be much of an issue
Yeah, I'm kinda thinking the same thing, Luka. Now, if Leica used the D800 sensor and removed the cfa, that could at least be a little more interesting.
Plus, as I mentioned earlier, those who'll find it necessary to use a yellow or red filter in this new camera are going to erase a lot of that light advantage, anyways.
This penchant of the camera industry to look backwards rather than forwards is silly. Why try and recreate the past when we can have the future? Nostalgia is fun but cummon...
Add to that the fact that going B&W is the only way that Leica could make their CCD's in any way begin to compete with modern sensors. They would need the extra 2 stops of DR and noise to get close.
There is probably a long line of people who have asked Leica for a B&W camera only. I presume that it will be made in limited quantities, maybe not as a limited edition though. I am sure the parts will be fully swappable with the M9-P, for minimal R&D costs. I guess as a special model it could make sense, even if it is never very profitable. Everyone who ever wanted a B&W camera can now start dreaming of this one.
Personally, I would prefer a full colour camera with a B&W mode and workflow, i.e. B&W on the rear screen, and hopefully also B&W after import into LR, which ought to be possible given their cooperation with Adobe.
I think it is actually a great idea and I applaud Leica for doing so. I personally would not buy one new but if I could find a used one for a decent price, I would most certainly try it out. If they do indeed release a B&W... A few more days and we will see!
carstenw wrote:
Personally, I would prefer a full colour camera with a B&W mode and workflow, i.e. B&W on the rear screen, and hopefully also B&W after import into LR, which ought to be possible given their cooperation with Adobe.
Out of curiosity, could you just shoot the camera in b&w jpeg mode with DNGs, and then import with a b&w user preset in Lightroom?
No, you need to shoot in DNG+JPG, which slows the camera down significantly. Early on in M8 days, you could set it to DNG+JPG, set the camera style to B&W and set the contrast and so on, then switch back to DNG, and it would stay in B&W mode, and generate a B&W thumbnail. I loved that mode, but there were glitches in the firmware which I needed fixed, so when Leica removed this ability I had to update anyway
denoir wrote:
Hmm, yes, but still no. I don't think many would give up color for 2 stops better high ISO performance - especially since you've already get about the same performance and color with the latest generation of sensors (i.e Canon 5DIII & Nikon D800 and whatnot compared to the M9). If they are going to make it an M9-X, it's very likely going to have the same M9 Kodak sensor. It's a fabulous low-ISO sensor but once you get above ISO 1600 it's less than impressive. Making it capable of half-decent ISO 6400 puts it at the level of a 5DIII, but without color. So if your objective is high ISO image quality, a current gen DSLR seems like a better choice as you get it in color....Show more →
I was of course only talking about the performance compared to the same sensor with filter. Anything else would be quite irrelevant since there is no M9 with D800 sensor.
I don't know, it seems kind of a silly idea altogether. I'm sure it will sell just fine, being Leica On the plus side the new owners can buy cheaper non-APO lenses as CA won't really be much of an issue
Not necessarily silly, though I wouldn't want one. But for someone ONLY shooting B&W, it's a great idea. If you're on a tripod shooting still scenes you could do color images too, if you take three shots with red, green and blue filters. That's how the first color photos were made with B&W film.
But seriously, and I am repeating myself I know, a B&W digital camera is not as attractive as a film camera in some ways, because you cannot change the "film". One look, modified with filters and processing. If you don't like that look, and I am sure it won't look like Tri-X or T-MAX, then you are out of luck. My guess is that the look will be more like one of the middle of the road Fuji B&W films Lots of tonality, not so much character.
@ millsart You have to really LOVE shooting b&w or have the means as to where cost is no object and simply pick one up as a second body to carry along with an existing m9. I'm sure it could produce some amazing files, but man.... first time I'm out with it and there just happens to be this amazing sunset right before my eyes and I'm stuck shooting it in b&w.... that would be frustrating
In the same way as you don't seem to get people wanting to limit themselves, I've never really got the sort of comment you made above.
For me its not so much really loving B&W (though I do) its more seeing that that's the aesthetic I want to work in - or to put it another way, that's what motivates me to explore my world photographically.
Unlike you, I never look at a sunset and think 'I wish I had colour' It simply doesn't interest me to shoot a sunset. Nor do I think 'I wish I had a long telephoto lens in order to get closer to the sporting action', It's simply not part of my photography repertoire to shoot sport. I simply don't need equipment that allows me to switch from colour to B&W, from reportage to sport to macro. I don't need swiss army knife readiness for all photographic opportunities.
I certainly don't want to define what photography should be about, but simply point out that the dilemmas that some people face with having limited equipment simply does not occur to others as being a 'problem' at all, but a conscious and happy choice instead.
I do shoot only B&W and for others like me it makes complete sense to try to get the most appropriate instrument to do that. (why would I want to compromise for an ability to do something I have no interest in?) Whether the M9 B&W, or whatever it will be called, will really fit that bill remains to be seen. Obviously, it will need to have significantly better DR and tonality than is currently available and better speed and less noise wouldn't go amiss. If its output has the tonality of my Rolleiflex with Tri-X 400, then I'd probably have to fork out the high price.
wolfloid wrote:
(why would I want to compromise for an ability to do something I have no interest in?)
Exactly. I never use AF and I don't have any problem with cameras without AF. Nor do I use continuous shooting, filming, auto-bracketing, ISO 100.000, and so on. So why would I want a camera that can do all that when it makes it cost more and become larger than necessary? Same thing.
I am not sure if better DR is really realistic (although digital does appear to have better DR if nothing clips in ugly ways), but I think that one thing which is absolutely crucial to the success of this camera is to have loads of highlight headroom. Clipped highlights would kill a digital B&W immediately, in many cases.
Well it's the same thing. Just a matter of where you put your zero level. Which here depends on the priorities you place for a specific photo.
Say your camera can capture 10 EV DR (as defined by your requirements for acceptable noise).
And coincidentally, you have a scene with 10 EV DR.
You expose 1/100 second, F2.8, ISO 100, and the camera captures the entire scene with acceptable noise and no clipped highlights.
Now you add a flash light to the scene, which is 3 EV higher than the original highlights in the scene. So total scene DR is 13 EV.
a) Do you keep the exposure settings the same?
--> Then the details in the flash light are blown out (clipped).
b) Do you bring down exposure time to 1/800 second?
--> Then the shadows will be very noisy.
As said, whether you choose a) or b) or something in between depends on your priorities for the picture.
If your camera could capture 13 EV you wouldn't have to worry about it for this scene...
And it's worth pointing out that high DR is completely realistic. The world around us is full of high contrasts. The negative notion we now have of "HDR" is because we try to fit a high dynamic range onto a display (screen or print) that has much smaller DR. And this does look unrealistic.
But if / when displays are able to show higher (true) dynamic range, then you will get a greater sense of realism and "being-there".
On the plus side the new owners can buy cheaper non-APO lenses as CA won't really be much of an issue 
