Re: Your experience having a Sony camera converted to Monochrome?
pfoiles wrote: BUT
Using the color information in a color raw file to control the B&W tonalities in monochrome images is a powerful tool that is lost when using a monochrome camera. When I was in my monochrome phase I also had a Leica Q2 Mono and took a workshop in digital B&W from a photographer who I knew owned and shot a Leica monochrome camera. I was surprised to learn that 80% of her monochorme work was from her color Leicas not her monochrome for the reason above. I have given monochrome shooting a serious try with both the Leica Q2 Mono and my converted A7RIII and have gotten some great images I am very happy with. But at the end of the day they are not any better than what I get from converting my color files. So even though I prefer to work in B&W fas much as possible my Sony mono gets very little use.
It very well may be that a monochrome camera is an itch that you just have to scratch but don't be surprised if the itch goes away after awhile.
While I understand that monochrome only cameras are a popular but very niche thing among some folks, as a photographer who creates and prints black and white photographs and who shot black and white film for decades, I don’t understand it.
First of all, you can produce absolutely first rate monochromatic images from color raw files. While some will tell you that the mono-only cameras as supposedly capable of sharper results, the images from converted color files have excellent resolution and sharpness. You can easily print them at 30” x 45” sizes if you are using a high resolution FF body and they look great — and larger is possible.
Second, and even more important, the monochrome-only cameras give up the color data and don’t allow you to bring it into post. We worked that way with film because we had little choice. (Color film did not convert to monochrome as well as color raw files do today.) But the advantages o bringing full color data into the post-processing stage are quite significant. For example:
1. filtering is much more powerful. You can apply any color of filtering in post and you can control its intensity in ways that were nearly impossible with filters on the camera. You can even apply the filtering selectively with masks — and even apply different color filters to different portions of the image. Put a red filter on the sky and a green filter on vegetation if you want, while leaving other areas of the image unfiltered.
2. Not only do you no longer need to carry around a bunch of color filters, but you don’t even really have to commit to one color filter interpretation at the time of exposure. Let’s say you think that a red filter might be good — just shoot the scene and then apply it in post and see if you like it… or how intense you want it to be… of if you want it everywhere in the image… of perhaps you want a different filter color.
3. Unless you are 100% committed to BW-only photography, sometimes a subject simply works better in color. Sometimes you have a hunch that monochrome or color might be better, but you aren’t sure. The color digital camera allows you to mentally commit to either… but with a full color capture you have the option of going either way in post.
Aug 01, 2025 at 10:53 PM
Previous versions of gdanmitchell's message #16862888 « Your experience having a Sony camera converted to Monochrome? »
