I enjoyed this review, but I think you have missed the point about a monochrome sensor. You are right the conversions from the colour Q has more contrast and pop and initially may seem more pleasing but all that can be done post production on the monochrome. The reason the monochrome seems flatter in its blacks out of camera is because the sensor is designed to get more detail out of the blacks - that 's the point of a monochrome sensor . It is just a simple tweek to add some contrast after to your own liking so you don't loose the details in the black. To my eye, even with TH-cam compression, there is significantly more detail and in particular graduation of greys especially on skin tone - look at the close up of the face at 4mins 10 sec. The subtle differences you mention are indeed subtle but only when viewed on screens. This sort of camera would be pointless if you were only going to shoot jpegs and upload to instagram etc... It would be when printing, especially in blacks detail that the monochrome would shine. I am very tempted by this camera but I am going to wait as I am sure a monochrome SL will be announced soon
Thank you for the comment, I appreciate you watching our video. I try not to discuss subjective things like editing methods and such because it leads to far too many variables and so on. Instead we try and discuss the objective differences that you can see. Also, in regards to print, that point only really holds water when comparing images shot on film. These are digital files and for the most part, seeing them on a high resolution, calibrated screen is more effective. This is especially the case when you consider all the different ways of printing an interpolation required to convert digital files into physical media. In short, it’s a fairer and more effective comparison when viewing on a screen otherwise too many other variables need to be accounted for. Once again, thank you for watching and for the comment.
Excellent point about the Monochrom sensor: it's really about that tonal roll-off, shadow recovery and grey scale. I have an M9 Mono and the prints from it are just astonishing (to me, anyway). The lack of the color filter array allows for incredibly subtle tonality especially in skin tones. I've heard some refer to that camera as a "pocket 4x5." I did really appreciate this review as well.
@@Sondercreative not really subjective when there is more detail to be taken from a raw file.. and on the point about screens versus print.. not so much, when many screens have different resolutions and likely are not even resolving the detail in such high megapixel modern cameras.. high quality, high dpi prints are probably the best test for any camera/lens.
I think part of the niche with the mono cameras is for people who started photography with b&w film. The natively monotone sensors naturally reproduce those rich mid tones that don’t sacrifice detail. If you started in b&w, it’s like seeing an old friend. And it’s tougher than you’d think to reproduce (trying to recover it out of contrasty converted photos).
If you’re going to shoot street at night the Monochrome’s is the way to go. If you’re not needing/wanting insanely good ISO performance, get the Q2 and convert to B&W. At least that’s the way I see it. But that new leather and matte finish is sexy AF.
I went for the monochrom mostly for better low light performance and cleaner more uniform noise. I have a nice non-Leica color camera so I had no issues sacrificing color on my Leica.
"Real world" for a mono shooter is not a 3 stop range in a low contrast coffee shop. Being able to shoot in the street or anywhere else where your contrast range is 6-8+ stops in printable shadow detail will want that capability of the Q2Mono. But your are right in that most do not need it nor will spend if they don't. Me, worth it. For old school film BnW shooters, this is money as is the M10 mono to be able to expose for the highs knowing the range can pull back the shadows in post and stay clean. If in the ecosystem either current mono Q and M10 is worth it if you have the cake that is. Just cause i said it was worth it doesn't mean i drop for it. LOL Fuji Acros works and my trusty M6 has not let me down in 31 years.
The black looks richer and the whites look cleaner on the monochrome.... but its not a big enough difference for the hobby photographer to buy if they choose only one camera.
As you would with black and white film, to get the contrast you want straight out of camera, you need to use color filters for the lens. That's just part of monochrome photography.
I think you are selling the Q2M a little short here. The real test of the two cameras is not to take images with like settings and compare them, although there is some value in that. Where it really matters is in what you can do in manipulating the images. If you pull the shadows or do highlight recovery in each of the images, then you will really start to understand how they differ quite significantly. And if you do need to shoot higher ISOs in BW, then it matters immensely. I think schtick it the wrong word - reviewers and people in general think that Leica is trying to make cameras for the entire world and overcharging for it. Rather, they are making cameras that are dead on in terms of their buyers and the people buying them find value in their minimalistic feature sets. I feel Leica are charging fair value. I have a Q2 and a M10M but I don't have a burning desire for the Q2M as I can meet my needs to with the M10 and a 28mm lens. But if and when a SL2M comes out I will be first to buy it as it will have all of the video connectivity for mics, monitoring, and external recording the Q2 lacks.
What you’re requesting we demonstrate diverts too far into the subjective realm. It then starts becoming a discussion about how to edit Leica files which has no real answer. Instead, we demonstrated the fact that dynamic range and low light performance in the new monochrom is significantly better, although the differences in other areas are not as noticeable. These are objective points. How you use that information to decide is up to the viewer but we can’t start talking about different ways of manipulating an image. Also, shtick can mean, special area of interest, talent or area of activity. We’re using that word in a positive manner and we also justify it by describing how it obviously works for Leicas customers.
Meh, it's the same when you desaturate color dng and try to manipulate it in lightroom, it behaves just like the dng from q2 monochrom. But the q2 monochrom has different picture profile, quite pleasing look straight from the camera.
@@filipradic5065 Absolutely false. You have no access to color channels in lightroom with a Monochrom file. That's why you have to use color filters on the lens if you want more contrast with certain colors. Monochrom shooter and color shooter are 2 different skill sets.
I agree, in macro mode the differences are hard to see but with the portraits and portrait crops the Q2M wins by a country mile. More tonality, less noise.
excellent review, thank you! i have been really struggling which to purchase....much of my shooting is in low light situations so the points you make clear regarding the improvements in image quality with the Q2 monochrom has resolved my dilema. ...... interesting that you seem to be the only reviewer to make clear this distinction, well done. thx again. zen billings from canada
hi..excellent work..one question..how would i get better photos...in my q2...?-- taking directly in white and enlarge...or taking in color and change in lightrom black and white?
Thanks for the honest review, for some the improvements of the dynamic range and high iso performance will be enough, but for most the Q2 is a better choice. The camera shake in the conclusions was a bit distracting. Keep up the good work.
Thanks for the video. You are helping me a lot to make my decision between Q2 and Q2M. But I have a question did you convert the images into B/N right in the camera or later with a computer? Thanks.
This was a great video. Thank you for acknowledging that the Q2 monochrome is a niche camera for certain segment of photographers. Not the usual Leica bashing. While the Q2 monochrome is not in my budget at this time, I prefer to shoot in black and white rather then convert. I use a Fuji xt3 set to the Acros film simulation.
Really good review . Having owned both the previous MM's as my main cameras for years i think the allure of the Mono applies more to the workflow and mindset . It is the initial intent of shooting only in monochrome and the usage of filters . A distinctly personal choice . This review is very very good , well done !
Images from the Monochrom were never meant to be straight out of camera. A big hint is the fact that the original Monochrom was bundled with Nik Silver efx. The Monochrom files are awesome to work with and need to be edited to "unlock" their true potential - like every other camera out there. If you review this camera in such a way that it's like you're losing color - you're missing the point and it's not for you. You make it sound like they just opened up a Q2 and scraped off the color filter. The sensor for the Monochrom was completely redesigned. Your video is the result of a color shooter reviewing a Monochrom camera. And you could of put a lot more effort into your actual images you took like 4 shots of some girl sitting in the same spot in a coffee shop plus one or 2 of her at an indoor location. You didn't like the camera before you even shot your video.
You’re making a lot of assumptions about me some of which are completely false. You don’t like my conclusions which is fine and you’re welcome to disagree but you’re taking it a step further and commenting on me. This mild attempt at discrediting me is uncalled for. Please be more reasonable in the future.
@@Sondercreative I was rather reasonable. You are the one that made the video, so of course my comments will involve you. The only real assumption I made about you personally is that you didn't like the camera before you even shot your vid. Also, I may have insinuated that you are a color shooter. I took a gander at your insta and sure, there are some bnw images there, but the majority of your images are color and it's clearly evident that you have a great understanding of color and capture it well with your love of architecture. I'm just saying - you are not primarily a black and white shooter, therefore you are going to be bias toward color; whether you're conscious of it or not. I sound like an ass. I'm not and I don't mean to be. I just don't think you gave the camera a fair shake or a true go. You were mostly dismissive of it.
I have to agree with this as comparing basically SOOC camera files without post is not a proper comparison. It’s known that the MM cameras from Leica need PP as many times (if not most times) MM files are very “flat” initially due to the sensor design & massive DR of the files. When the first Monochrome was launched by Leica, there was eruption of complaints about the SOOC camera files UNTIL - everyone realized that the SOOC files should kind of be seen as “negatives” needing post. @Sonder Creative, I don’t think there was any bad intent in your video, but Andrew’s comment brings up a critical flaw in your review.
The monochrome handles the highlights much better. Also you'd really want to compare prints rather than comparisons on a screen. The point of a camera like this isn't to get max specs. I think something like a Sony is better for that. Either you get the advantages of simplicity and limitation or you don't.
Good point about the highlights, I agree. In regards to printing, I’m not so sure because this isn’t a film camera. Viewing digital images via digital means is more than sufficient.
I really love the low light options with this. I played around with some RAW samples and the low noise at high ISO is incredible. I am invested in Fuji with a XT3, XT20, and 7 lenses, but I have thought of keeping a little fuji for color (XT3, pancake 27mm and stock 18-55 zoom) and sell the rest to fund one of these since I shoot mainly BW. I do a lot of bike packing, and having the resolution to crop instead of bringing a bigger lense is great, and the water/dust sealing is a bonus-most of my lenses are non-WR. The macro feature on the 28mm Leica is a nice bonus too.
When you import dng from the q2 monochrom, lightroom automatically adds noise reduction in the detail tab. That could be why it has less noise than the q2.
My secondary body (5D Mk III) is set to monochrome jpegs so that I can see my shots in B/W when I review them from the camera (raw files still come out in color). My film camera is loaded with B/W ISO 400 film. But I am still having a hard time deciding whether or not to buy into the Q2 monochrom. Feels like I should love it... but I can't commit.
Great vid! I actually prefer the added contrast in the images from the original Q2. In comparison to the monochrome, it has a slightly “pushed” look to it. New sub ..... love your content.
You have answered my question. The monochrome isn’t worth the money unless you are a (professional.) niche market shooter. Otherwise? the Q2 does more than just fine.
Thanks for watching man appreciate it. I disagree with the printing point though. When you print images far too many other variables are introduced. Youre converting a natively digital file onto an analog medium whilst simultaneously undergoing a whole range of adjustments in order to accomplish that. Also so much of it relies on the printing firm, how they calibrate and a slew of other things that get mixed into the equation. At that point, youre comparing the print quality of the firm you pick not the actual results from the sensor. This leads to muddied results that dont benefit the viewer. Comparing digital files means you’re seeing what the camera produced. The viewer has a relatively better chance to see a more objective result.
Thanks for watching man appreciate it. I disagree with the printing point though. When you print images far too many other variables are introduced. Youre converting a natively digital file onto an analog medium whilst simultaneously undergoing a whole range of adjustments in order to accomplish that. Also so much of it relies on the printing firm, how they calibrate and a slew of other things that get mixed into the equation. At that point, youre comparing the print quality of the firm you pick not the actual results from the sensor. This leads to muddied results that dont benefit the viewer. Comparing digital files means you’re seeing what the camera produced. The viewer has a relatively better chance to see a more objective result.
Great review Unman, thank you. It makes the differences very clear and easy to see. For me the greater contrast and punch of the converted Q2 images are much better than the flatter shades-ofgrey from the Monochrome. I wouldn't even mind the higher iso noise because it looks like a nice film grain. I'd just need to take a red sharpie pen to the yellow lens markings...
Great real world review, presenting the facts. You could have easily taken the cliche route and said the Q2M is vastly superior. Honest reviewers are the best reviewers.
What if the sensor is being produced with the color array by default factory/production line setting and the change of production change-over to produce a small amount of color array-less sensors is being accounted for in the higher cost?
Sharpness is a lie. Also, the "softer" light in B&W is a very 1950s vibe much like flat video and flat tones. Its why B&W is "flat" on concrast when you remove what Leica did. Sort of a nerd slant, but it is what it is. You want neutral f-log type flat images to give you the best flexiblity in going up / down on the curves.
$6000 for a camera that shoots only black and white, My Nikon F4 and Ilford HP5+ can do that for a whole lot less. It cost me about $25 for a roll of b/w film and developing, that's about 240 rolls of 36, or about 8640 photos, just saying :)
I took 8000 photos in 3 weeks with the same rate with my digital camera but maybe you meant in 6 years for you as if you would go with the same rate maybe you could buy a Ferrari or something
Leica in the boardroom: we already rip everyone off with our overpriced photo gear, I wonder if the fools will pay even more for a camera that provides less?
Haha, That would be funny. I don’t think that’s the case though because the people that tend to buy these cameras are comfortable spending the amount it’s a luxury segment of the market.
Leica Q2 - bhpho.to/3ketaZw
Leica Q2 Monochrom - bhpho.to/3neLHH1
Check out our new store - sondercreative.com/store
I enjoyed this review, but I think you have missed the point about a monochrome sensor. You are right the conversions from the colour Q has more contrast and pop and initially may seem more pleasing but all that can be done post production on the monochrome. The reason the monochrome seems flatter in its blacks out of camera is because the sensor is designed to get more detail out of the blacks - that 's the point of a monochrome sensor . It is just a simple tweek to add some contrast after to your own liking so you don't loose the details in the black. To my eye, even with TH-cam compression, there is significantly more detail and in particular graduation of greys especially on skin tone - look at the close up of the face at 4mins 10 sec. The subtle differences you mention are indeed subtle but only when viewed on screens. This sort of camera would be pointless if you were only going to shoot jpegs and upload to instagram etc... It would be when printing, especially in blacks detail that the monochrome would shine. I am very tempted by this camera but I am going to wait as I am sure a monochrome SL will be announced soon
Thank you for the comment, I appreciate you watching our video.
I try not to discuss subjective things like editing methods and such because it leads to far too many variables and so on. Instead we try and discuss the objective differences that you can see.
Also, in regards to print, that point only really holds water when comparing images shot on film. These are digital files and for the most part, seeing them on a high resolution, calibrated screen is more effective. This is especially the case when you consider all the different ways of printing an interpolation required to convert digital files into physical media. In short, it’s a fairer and more effective comparison when viewing on a screen otherwise too many other variables need to be accounted for.
Once again, thank you for watching and for the comment.
Excellent point about the Monochrom sensor: it's really about that tonal roll-off, shadow recovery and grey scale. I have an M9 Mono and the prints from it are just astonishing (to me, anyway). The lack of the color filter array allows for incredibly subtle tonality especially in skin tones. I've heard some refer to that camera as a "pocket 4x5." I did really appreciate this review as well.
Exactly, excellent points.
@@Sondercreative not really subjective when there is more detail to be taken from a raw file.. and on the point about screens versus print.. not so much, when many screens have different resolutions and likely are not even resolving the detail in such high megapixel modern cameras.. high quality, high dpi prints are probably the best test for any camera/lens.
@@TylerMcCool the subjective point was more about the “look” of the bw pictures between cameras.
I think part of the niche with the mono cameras is for people who started photography with b&w film. The natively monotone sensors naturally reproduce those rich mid tones that don’t sacrifice detail. If you started in b&w, it’s like seeing an old friend. And it’s tougher than you’d think to reproduce (trying to recover it out of contrasty converted photos).
If you’re going to shoot street at night the Monochrome’s is the way to go.
If you’re not needing/wanting insanely good ISO performance, get the Q2 and convert to B&W.
At least that’s the way I see it.
But that new leather and matte finish is sexy AF.
I went for the monochrom mostly for better low light performance and cleaner more uniform noise.
I have a nice non-Leica color camera so I had no issues sacrificing color on my Leica.
Hi Michael, which cameras you’ve combined with leica q2m for color photography?
@@artemkanaki9274 I am using a Canon R3 for color. Not as compact/convenient as the Q2 for sure!
"Real world" for a mono shooter is not a 3 stop range in a low contrast coffee shop. Being able to shoot in the street or anywhere else where your contrast range is 6-8+ stops in printable shadow detail will want that capability of the Q2Mono. But your are right in that most do not need it nor will spend if they don't. Me, worth it. For old school film BnW shooters, this is money as is the M10 mono to be able to expose for the highs knowing the range can pull back the shadows in post and stay clean. If in the ecosystem either current mono Q and M10 is worth it if you have the cake that is. Just cause i said it was worth it doesn't mean i drop for it. LOL Fuji Acros works and my trusty M6 has not let me down in 31 years.
The black looks richer and the whites look cleaner on the monochrome.... but its not a big enough difference for the hobby photographer to buy if they choose only one camera.
As you would with black and white film, to get the contrast you want straight out of camera, you need to use color filters for the lens. That's just part of monochrome photography.
Very good point and completely true.
Like a red filter
I think you are selling the Q2M a little short here. The real test of the two cameras is not to take images with like settings and compare them, although there is some value in that. Where it really matters is in what you can do in manipulating the images. If you pull the shadows or do highlight recovery in each of the images, then you will really start to understand how they differ quite significantly. And if you do need to shoot higher ISOs in BW, then it matters immensely. I think schtick it the wrong word - reviewers and people in general think that Leica is trying to make cameras for the entire world and overcharging for it. Rather, they are making cameras that are dead on in terms of their buyers and the people buying them find value in their minimalistic feature sets. I feel Leica are charging fair value. I have a Q2 and a M10M but I don't have a burning desire for the Q2M as I can meet my needs to with the M10 and a 28mm lens. But if and when a SL2M comes out I will be first to buy it as it will have all of the video connectivity for mics, monitoring, and external recording the Q2 lacks.
What you’re requesting we demonstrate diverts too far into the subjective realm. It then starts becoming a discussion about how to edit Leica files which has no real answer.
Instead, we demonstrated the fact that dynamic range and low light performance in the new monochrom is significantly better, although the differences in other areas are not as noticeable. These are objective points. How you use that information to decide is up to the viewer but we can’t start talking about different ways of manipulating an image.
Also, shtick can mean, special area of interest, talent or area of activity. We’re using that word in a positive manner and we also justify it by describing how it obviously works for Leicas customers.
Meh, it's the same when you desaturate color dng and try to manipulate it in lightroom, it behaves just like the dng from q2 monochrom. But the q2 monochrom has different picture profile, quite pleasing look straight from the camera.
@@filipradic5065 Absolutely false. You have no access to color channels in lightroom with a Monochrom file. That's why you have to use color filters on the lens if you want more contrast with certain colors. Monochrom shooter and color shooter are 2 different skill sets.
I’m wondering if you made any large format prints while using this camera. If so, how do the look compared to like a darkroom print?
I agree, in macro mode the differences are hard to see but with the portraits and portrait crops the Q2M wins by a country mile. More tonality, less noise.
excellent review, thank you! i have been really struggling which to purchase....much of my shooting is in low light situations so the points you make clear regarding the improvements in image quality with the Q2 monochrom has resolved my dilema. ...... interesting that you seem to be the only reviewer to make clear this distinction, well done. thx again. zen billings from canada
hi..excellent work..one question..how would i get better photos...in my q2...?-- taking directly in white and enlarge...or taking in color and change in lightrom black and white?
I noticed some hot pixels in the Q2 monochrom. Hopefully that's not common but I definitely saw more than a few. Didn't notice any of the regular Q2.
i thought this video might help me giving up the idea buying a Q2M. I was wrong. After seeing those picture comparision. I want a Q2M even more.
Thanks for the honest review, for some the improvements of the dynamic range and high iso performance will be enough, but for most the Q2 is a better choice. The camera shake in the conclusions was a bit distracting. Keep up the good work.
Thanks for the video. You are helping me a lot to make my decision between Q2 and Q2M. But I have a question did you convert the images into B/N right in the camera or later with a computer? Thanks.
Both, Raw files can always be converted back so I tested both.
The lower contrast look of the mono is better image fidelity. The smoother transition of tones. It's night and day
This was a great video. Thank you for acknowledging that the Q2 monochrome is a niche camera for certain segment of photographers. Not the usual Leica bashing. While the Q2 monochrome is not in my budget at this time, I prefer to shoot in black and white rather then convert. I use a Fuji xt3 set to the Acros film simulation.
Great comparison. Very helpful!
Really good review . Having owned both the previous MM's as my main cameras for years i think the allure of the Mono applies more to the workflow and mindset . It is the initial intent of shooting only in monochrome and the usage of filters . A distinctly personal choice . This review is very very good , well done !
Thanks for such a great comparison, now I can make an informed decision.
Images from the Monochrom were never meant to be straight out of camera. A big hint is the fact that the original Monochrom was bundled with Nik Silver efx. The Monochrom files are awesome to work with and need to be edited to "unlock" their true potential - like every other camera out there. If you review this camera in such a way that it's like you're losing color - you're missing the point and it's not for you. You make it sound like they just opened up a Q2 and scraped off the color filter. The sensor for the Monochrom was completely redesigned. Your video is the result of a color shooter reviewing a Monochrom camera. And you could of put a lot more effort into your actual images you took like 4 shots of some girl sitting in the same spot in a coffee shop plus one or 2 of her at an indoor location. You didn't like the camera before you even shot your video.
You’re making a lot of assumptions about me some of which are completely false. You don’t like my conclusions which is fine and you’re welcome to disagree but you’re taking it a step further and commenting on me.
This mild attempt at discrediting me is uncalled for.
Please be more reasonable in the future.
@@Sondercreative I was rather reasonable. You are the one that made the video, so of course my comments will involve you. The only real assumption I made about you personally is that you didn't like the camera before you even shot your vid. Also, I may have insinuated that you are a color shooter. I took a gander at your insta and sure, there are some bnw images there, but the majority of your images are color and it's clearly evident that you have a great understanding of color and capture it well with your love of architecture. I'm just saying - you are not primarily a black and white shooter, therefore you are going to be bias toward color; whether you're conscious of it or not. I sound like an ass. I'm not and I don't mean to be. I just don't think you gave the camera a fair shake or a true go. You were mostly dismissive of it.
I have to agree with this as comparing basically SOOC camera files without post is not a proper comparison. It’s known that the MM cameras from Leica need PP as many times (if not most times) MM files are very “flat” initially due to the sensor design & massive DR of the files. When the first Monochrome was launched by Leica, there was eruption of complaints about the SOOC camera files UNTIL - everyone realized that the SOOC files should kind of be seen as “negatives” needing post. @Sonder Creative, I don’t think there was any bad intent in your video, but Andrew’s comment brings up a critical flaw in your review.
The monochrome handles the highlights much better. Also you'd really want to compare prints rather than comparisons on a screen. The point of a camera like this isn't to get max specs. I think something like a Sony is better for that. Either you get the advantages of simplicity and limitation or you don't.
Good point about the highlights, I agree. In regards to printing, I’m not so sure because this isn’t a film camera.
Viewing digital images via digital means is more than sufficient.
Its a big difference in extremly low light situations and high iso.
would like to see a comparison of video perfrmance between these two cameras, is Q2 mono able to create sharper videos even in the same resolution
I’m sorry, unfortunately we didn’t test that feature.
I really love the low light options with this. I played around with some RAW samples and the low noise at high ISO is incredible. I am invested in Fuji with a XT3, XT20, and 7 lenses, but I have thought of keeping a little fuji for color (XT3, pancake 27mm and stock 18-55 zoom) and sell the rest to fund one of these since I shoot mainly BW. I do a lot of bike packing, and having the resolution to crop instead of bringing a bigger lense is great, and the water/dust sealing is a bonus-most of my lenses are non-WR. The macro feature on the 28mm Leica is a nice bonus too.
And BTW, thanks for the review! It confirmed the low light performance. The 25000 ISO files are even pretty good that I played with!
smoother grey area imo, i have a 246 monochrom, it's just better.
So if you had one, would you swap your q2 Monochrom for a color q2?
I would but that’s only because I hardly ever shoot black and white.
I have the Q2 and will sell it and getting a Q2M
It's hard to get a good price for the Q2
And also, at the end of the day it's ain't what ya got, it's the way that ya do it....
I wonder if there will be a firmware update in a month or two to improve Q2M a bit more.
Possibly, that could be interesting and offer greater value to customers that have bought it.
See version 1.10
When you import dng from the q2 monochrom, lightroom automatically adds noise reduction in the detail tab. That could be why it has less noise than the q2.
It has less noise because it’s a redesigned sensor. Noise reduction in LR wouldn’t be anywhere near as good.
Hope that helps :).
monochrome sensors will always have less noise than any color sensor - it is less data processing anyway hence less artifacts and noise.
My secondary body (5D Mk III) is set to monochrome jpegs so that I can see my shots in B/W when I review them from the camera (raw files still come out in color). My film camera is loaded with B/W ISO 400 film. But I am still having a hard time deciding whether or not to buy into the Q2 monochrom. Feels like I should love it... but I can't commit.
Great vid! I actually prefer the added contrast in the images from the original Q2. In comparison to the monochrome, it has a slightly “pushed” look to it. New sub ..... love your content.
Thank you so much, that's brilliant :). Really appreciate it.
You have answered my question. The monochrome isn’t worth the money unless you are a (professional.) niche market shooter. Otherwise? the Q2 does more than just fine.
I do agree that monochrom is not for everyone. But you can't compare like this. Try printing out and compare.
Thanks for watching man appreciate it. I disagree with the printing point though. When you print images far too many other variables are introduced. Youre converting a natively digital file onto an analog medium whilst simultaneously undergoing a whole range of adjustments in order to accomplish that.
Also so much of it relies on the printing firm, how they calibrate and a slew of other things that get mixed into the equation. At that point, youre comparing the print quality of the firm you pick not the actual results from the sensor. This leads to muddied results that dont benefit the viewer.
Comparing digital files means you’re seeing what the camera produced. The viewer has a relatively better chance to see a more objective result.
Thanks for watching man appreciate it. I disagree with the printing point though. When you print images far too many other variables are introduced. Youre converting a natively digital file onto an analog medium whilst simultaneously undergoing a whole range of adjustments in order to accomplish that.
Also so much of it relies on the printing firm, how they calibrate and a slew of other things that get mixed into the equation. At that point, youre comparing the print quality of the firm you pick not the actual results from the sensor. This leads to muddied results that dont benefit the viewer.
Comparing digital files means you’re seeing what the camera produced. The viewer has a relatively better chance to see a more objective result.
as a color shooter i would always prefer the q2
Excellent explanation
Great video. Thank you
Great review Unman, thank you. It makes the differences very clear and easy to see. For me the greater contrast and punch of the converted Q2 images are much better than the flatter shades-ofgrey from the Monochrome. I wouldn't even mind the higher iso noise because it looks like a nice film grain. I'd just need to take a red sharpie pen to the yellow lens markings...
Read more books on why the black and white from photography roots ... it'll clue you in why we are nerds over here on this side.
Great real world review, presenting the facts. You could have easily taken the cliche route and said the Q2M is vastly superior. Honest reviewers are the best reviewers.
Thank you :).
Great job bro
Thank you :). I couldn't have done without Anete and Sophie.
the fact that they took something out and charged 1k more really doesn't sit with me
What if the sensor is being produced with the color array by default factory/production line setting and the change of production change-over to produce a small amount of color array-less sensors is being accounted for in the higher cost?
Lost me at what all the companies who produce black & white cameras....
I'm certain there's more than one. I know Phase One produce a black and white back for their XF bodies.
Great enjoyable video
I will take Q2 monochrome 🥃
Thanks Usman
Thank you for watching :).
Low light beast. Under expose then raise in post. Have to understand the camera.
I can absolutely imagine it being incredible for people shooting in low light scenarios. High ISO performance is incredible.
Top video :) love it
Yes it's worth it.
Rookie review :)
Ok :). Thank you for watching.
Sharpness is a lie. Also, the "softer" light in B&W is a very 1950s vibe much like flat video and flat tones. Its why B&W is "flat" on concrast when you remove what Leica did.
Sort of a nerd slant, but it is what it is. You want neutral f-log type flat images to give you the best flexiblity in going up / down on the curves.
$6000 for a camera that shoots only black and white, My Nikon F4 and
Ilford HP5+ can do that for a whole lot less. It cost me about $25 for a
roll of b/w film and developing, that's about 240 rolls of 36, or about
8640 photos, just saying :)
I took 8000 photos in 3 weeks with the same rate with my digital camera but maybe you meant in 6 years for you as if you would go with the same rate maybe you could buy a Ferrari or something
Leica in the boardroom: we already rip everyone off with our overpriced photo gear, I wonder if the fools will pay even more for a camera that provides less?
Haha, That would be funny. I don’t think that’s the case though because the people that tend to buy these cameras are comfortable spending the amount it’s a luxury segment of the market.