Reading mode: Light Dark

Monochrome sensor ? on Df

Go to last post
J

jacketpotato

Senior Member
Messages
2,244
Reaction score
554
Would perhaps be what Nikon see as "Pure Photography"

Sets Df apart from D6xx D8xx not just cosmetically but also internally.

White balance settings a non issue.

Rear LCD just for checking photgrpah taken and formatting card (although both these could be done in hybrid EVF thus doing away with rear LCD).
 
jacketpotato said:
Would perhaps be what Nikon see as "Pure Photography"

Sets Df apart from D6xx D8xx not just cosmetically but also internally.

White balance settings a non issue.

Rear LCD just for checking photgrpah taken and formatting card (although both these could be done in hybrid EVF thus doing away with rear LCD).
Click to expand...
No. Not even remotely possible.
 
Stacey_K said:
Plus B&W in post allows you to "change the filter". Something I only dreamed of when I used to shoot B&W film.
Click to expand...
Would the hybrid EVF show the effect of fitting RGBY filters on lens (if the EVF view is from a monochrome sensor).
 
Colour is defined by the computer processor and not by the sensor (IR apart which needs different sensors). So stating something is B&W has no real meaning.
 
Mr Gadget said:
jacketpotato said:
stevo23 said:
No. Not even remotely possible.
Click to expand...
Why
Click to expand...
Way too few customers. BW easily accomplished in post without any issues.
Click to expand...
I'm not thinking there would be a big enough market for a B&W sensor either, but there would be advantages over shooting color and then converting to BW. If you remove the color filter array, you get significantly more sensitivity (much better high ISO performance) and higher native ISO and higher resolution (because every single pixel contributes uniquely rather than need an RGB set to make a pixel.
 
romfordbluenose said:
Colour is defined by the computer processor and not by the sensor (IR apart which needs different sensors). So stating something is B&W has no real meaning.
Click to expand...
Color sensitivity (the ability to tell one color from another) is enabled by the color filter array on top of the sensor.
 
jfriend00 said:
jfriend00 said:
there would be advantages over shooting color and then converting to BW. If you remove the color filter array, you get significantly more sensitivity (much better high ISO performance) and higher native ISO and higher resolution (because every single pixel contributes uniquely rather than need an RGB set to make a pixel.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Yes it would be D700 sensitivity taken up a few nothces and 16MP possibly looking more as 24MP. The image would be in Nikon marketing Df speak "Purer" due to no CFA and no interpolation to get the colour image.
 
Just like Leica I really can't see Nikon releasing an entirely new camera as monochrome only but if they were to modify an existing camera it does look like a good model to go with.

The other direction I could see Nikon going is releasing a monochrome version of one of the 1 system cameras, you could argue that the improved ISO performance would be more needed there and help the system stand up to m43/ASPC mirrorless better.
 
jacketpotato said:
Would perhaps be what Nikon see as "Pure Photography"
Click to expand...
No.
jacketpotato said:
Sets Df apart from D6xx D8xx not just cosmetically but also internally.

White balance settings a non issue.

Rear LCD just for checking photgrpah taken and formatting card (although both these could be done in hybrid EVF thus doing away with rear LCD).
Click to expand...
I love shooting B&W film. I have zero interest in shooting B&W digital. I would never spend $3000 and a digital B&W camera and lose tons of PP flexibility that I get by turning color raw files into B&W on the computer.
 
Every sensor - except for the Foveon is B&W. In fact the Foveon is three monochrome sensors (one for each layer) with different spectral responses. Color is derived by laying a color filter array over the sensor and interpolating to produce color. That was Dr. Bayer's contribution to photography.

In reality it would be fairly easy for Nikon to produce both a monochrome and color version. Simply eliminate the CFA for the monochrome.
jfriend00 said:
Mr Gadget said:
jacketpotato said:
stevo23 said:
No. Not even remotely possible.
Click to expand...
Why
Click to expand...
Way too few customers. BW easily accomplished in post without any issues.
Click to expand...
I'm not thinking there would be a big enough market for a B&W sensor either, but there would be advantages over shooting color and then converting to BW. If you remove the color filter array, you get significantly more sensitivity (much better high ISO performance) and higher native ISO and higher resolution (because every single pixel contributes uniquely rather than need an RGB set to make a pixel.
Click to expand...
 
Truman Prevatt said:
Every sensor - except for the Foveon is B&W. In fact the Foveon is three monochrome sensors (one for each layer) with different spectral responses. Color is derived by laying a color filter array over the sensor and interpolating to produce color. That was Dr. Bayer's contribution to photography.

In reality it would be fairly easy for Nikon to produce both a monochrome and color version. Simply eliminate the CFA for the monochrome.
Click to expand...
I don't know what you're trying to argue. Removing the CFA and recording only luminosity with no color filters in the way would create both a higher resolution image and an image with a lot more signal (thus lower SNR) than one recorded in color, demosaiced in color and then converted to B&W.

Yes, two versions of a camera could be made, one with and one without the CFA and there would need to be different software also for dealing with the monochrome image recording rather than a CFA image recording. Also, different RAW format that would need to be handled differently by various RAW converters.

All doable, but the main question is whether there's a big enough market for a B&W only camera version?
 
jfriend00 said:
I don't know what you're trying to argue. Removing the CFA and recording only luminosity with no color filters in the way would create both a higher resolution image and an image with a lot more signal (thus lower SNR) than one recorded in color, demosaiced in color and then converted to B&W.

Yes, two versions of a camera could be made, one with and one without the CFA and there would need to be different software also for dealing with the monochrome image recording rather than a CFA image recording. Also, different RAW format that would need to be handled differently by various RAW converters.
Click to expand...
well if it was black and white only, then there wouldn't really be any need for RAW, you could just save a 16bit tiff, and be done with it. Sure there is sharpening, and corrections, but if it's a "pure" camera... skip all that extra processing, and make it super cheap :)

If it was < $1500, I'd consider one, but unless it had a color option, it's really gonna be niche, probably too niche for me :) Though, I'm sure some industrious people would make a color filter swapper that could take successive color photos, and go for the glory.
 
Joesiv said:
jfriend00 said:
I don't know what you're trying to argue. Removing the CFA and recording only luminosity with no color filters in the way would create both a higher resolution image and an image with a lot more signal (thus lower SNR) than one recorded in color, demosaiced in color and then converted to B&W.

Yes, two versions of a camera could be made, one with and one without the CFA and there would need to be different software also for dealing with the monochrome image recording rather than a CFA image recording. Also, different RAW format that would need to be handled differently by various RAW converters.
Click to expand...
well if it was black and white only, then there wouldn't really be any need for RAW, you could just save a 16bit tiff, and be done with it. Sure there is sharpening, and corrections, but if it's a "pure" camera... skip all that extra processing, and make it super cheap :)
Click to expand...
You have to have a RAW image first before you convert it to tiff. Whether you save a raw image to the flash card or not is sort of irrelevant. Nikon still needs to code a RAW converter for the camera. And I think you would still want a RAW file for those instances where you are trying to recover shadows and highlights. You can't really do that if you've already converted to tiff.
 
michaeladawson said:
Joesiv said:
jfriend00 said:
I don't know what you're trying to argue. Removing the CFA and recording only luminosity with no color filters in the way would create both a higher resolution image and an image with a lot more signal (thus lower SNR) than one recorded in color, demosaiced in color and then converted to B&W.

Yes, two versions of a camera could be made, one with and one without the CFA and there would need to be different software also for dealing with the monochrome image recording rather than a CFA image recording. Also, different RAW format that would need to be handled differently by various RAW converters.
Click to expand...
well if it was black and white only, then there wouldn't really be any need for RAW, you could just save a 16bit tiff, and be done with it. Sure there is sharpening, and corrections, but if it's a "pure" camera... skip all that extra processing, and make it super cheap :)
Click to expand...
You have to have a RAW image first before you convert it to tiff. Whether you save a raw image to the flash card or not is sort of irrelevant. Nikon still needs to code a RAW converter for the camera. And I think you would still want a RAW file for those instances where you are trying to recover shadows and highlights. You can't really do that if you've already converted to tiff.
Click to expand...
I think the point here is that a RAW monochrome image is basically already the same data that goes into a TIFF image. There's no color profile to process. There's no demosaicing to do. If the TIFF is 16-bits, then the 14-bits of data from the sensor fits directly into the 16-bit TIFF. So, there's really no RAW conversion to do. You just take the RAW data from the sensor and put it into a 16-bit TIFF format. The 16-bit TIFF could do just as much shadow and highlight recovery as a RAW image (because the data would be the same).
 
Simple, the cost to engineer the DF is not trivial.

The market share of monochrome buyers is smaller than that of color. It would be economically stupid to restrict your market share to a smaller market segment when a larger one is available.

Even Leica did not do this, they utilized an existing platform and dropped in a monochrome sensor. This is much less costly than spinning a design from scratch like the DF.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

studio460
Nikon FM3A | Nikon Df: Lens compatibility . . .
Replies
16
Views
23K
GeoffRG
G
I
DxO and Fuji Film Simulations
Replies
0
Views
15K
ikolbyi
I
primeshooter
Just love the D810 Sensor
Replies
8
Views
3K
Tord S Eriksson
Tord S Eriksson
H
Custom EVF/LCD framing grids using pixel-perfect raw files
Replies
1
Views
10K
John Ideal
J
Genome58
Double Exposure - Adapted lenses on J5s
Replies
2
Views
11K
Tord S Eriksson
Tord S Eriksson

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top