Nikon Canon and Sony would probably never do this, however the idea is intriguing and I get that color can be processed to monochrom in post. I loved using a Leica monochrom but gave up rangefinder focusing due to eye issues. I would jump on a Z7ii monochrom. Coupled with the 20, 50, and 85 f/1.8 lenses it would be great. What do you think? Nikon, please do this.
I understand the appeal, but unless there were *significant* ISO or other visible benefits, I would really miss the ability to use the color mixer to dial in the B&W look I want. I'm not especially interested in going back to using red and yellow filters on my lenses.
It would be nice to have a good monochrom with AF. I use M10 Monochrome often and it is a lot of fun. At least now Leica has a good EVF unlike M246 monochrom.
I think you will get at least 1-1.5 stop noise benefit just by removing bayer filter and more light is able to get in. To my eyes, its ISO performance seems to be at least as good as D6 and sometimes even better with 40 mp.
But it is hard to tell sometimes as I tolerate noise grain much more in BW picture than color picture usually. In general, I would go up as high as iso 3200-10000 without much concern at all.
If Z7 monochrom can do that, it would be great. M10r noise level is not any better than Z7 ii for sure so I assume a Z7 ii monochrom conversion would enjoy similar benefit.
Monochrome Imaging most likely will too. I’ve been thinking about talking to him about a Z5 conversion. Lose PDAF with conversions so newer faster sensors only useful for high ISOs but you get extra sensitivity anyway, and cleaner grain so not hugely concerned.
Edit: but yea I’d prefer & love an OEM from Nikon or Sony.
runamuck wrote:
No setting for in camera B&W?
Yes, it does have mono setting in Picture Controls.
But a mono sensor would have certain advantages (as well as disadvantages).
The CFA filters out a certain amount of light so it reduces the quantum efficiency of the sensor. Depending on the strength of the CFA it could be around 1 stop light loss.
Without the need for AA filters or to demosiac to form a colour image, you should also get a sharper image.
But on the downside your blown highlights are blown. No chance of recovery. Also you can’t play with colour channel mixers in post cos there aren’t any separate RGB info.
A camera with a very weak CFA that outputs in mono might be a good compromise but I’m not sure.
swifty168 wrote:
The Bayer removal also strips the PDAF half masking though, so you loose OSPDAF but retain CDAF.
Most users looking for monochrome capture aren’t needing the latest and greatest AF capability, so that loss is relatively minor IMHO. However, it also mitigates the need to convert a Z2 over a Z1 — and that’s probably a more significant point.
Next we get into each sensor, and the Z7 conversions have had grid/banding issues where the Z6 has not. Net gain resolution from mono probably puts a converted Z6 very close to a color Z7, so it is probably the best bet for aftermarket conversion at this time.
Source for banding issues with Z7 vs Z6? Curious who’s converted these.
gear-nut wrote:
Most users looking for monochrome capture aren’t needing the latest and greatest AF capability, so that loss is relatively minor IMHO. However, it also mitigates the need to convert a Z2 over a Z1 — and that’s probably a more significant point.
Next we get into each sensor, and the Z7 conversions have had grid/banding issues where the Z6 has not. Net gain resolution from mono probably puts a converted Z6 very close to a color Z7, so it is probably the best bet for aftermarket conversion at this time.
Vivek beat me too it. The mono conversion removes the PDAF masks, it’s a step a spectrum conversion would not take, so banding issue that’s also visible on stock camera would remain. Same reason you lose PDAF focus ability in a converted camera.
Vivek, do you think that bands could appear from processor expecting the masks though after conversion? Nikon seems to be handling it differently than Sony though I don’t know exactly how either is doing it.
swifty168 wrote:
Yes, it does have mono setting in Picture Controls.
But a mono sensor would have certain advantages (as well as disadvantages).
The CFA filters out a certain amount of light so it reduces the quantum efficiency of the sensor. Depending on the strength of the CFA it could be around 1 stop light loss.
Without the need for AA filters or to demosiac to form a colour image, you should also get a sharper image.
But on the downside your blown highlights are blown. No chance of recovery. Also you can’t play with colour channel mixers in post cos there aren’t any separate RGB info.
A camera with a very weak CFA that outputs in mono might be a good compromise but I’m not sure....Show more →
When I got my D700 converted to 830NM IR all I did was change it to B&W from color. I was sure there was a B&W option in my other cams.
I do not believe the banding attributed to PDAF is correct. I am of the opinion that the banding only shows up when insufficient exposure happens.
The “full spectrum” converted Z6 shows banding in UV. I have already shown that the cover glass on the Z6 (or for that matter the cover glass of D850) allows very little UV (https://www.flickr.com/photos/vivek-iyer/51206721156/). SonyA7r “full spectrum” camera also behaves the same way (UVcaptures and banding). Sony A7R has no PDAF elements.
While no such problem exists with cover glass and infrared transmission but modern lenses do have IR transmission issues from their coatings. So, the infrared banding could come from lack of transmission through the system lenses.
AdaptedLenses wrote:
Vivek beat me too it. The mono conversion removes the PDAF masks, it’s a step a spectrum conversion would not take, so banding issue that’s also visible on stock camera would remain. Same reason you lose PDAF focus ability in a converted camera.
Vivek, do you think that bands could appear from processor expecting the masks though after conversion? Nikon seems to be handling it differently than Sony though I don’t know exactly how either is doing it.
