Monochrome sensor ? on Df

Best b&w is developed from color file by yourself.
 
Best b&w is developed from color file by yourself.
It would be interesting though if you had 3x the ISO sensitivity and 3x the number of pixels which is what would happen with no color filter array. Today's 24MP sensor would actually be 72MP of pixels with a base ISO of 400 and performance up to ISO ~100,000. Certainly a specialty camera, but perhaps some interesting uses.
 
Best b&w is developed from color file by yourself.
you had 3x the ISO sensitivity and 3x the number of pixels
That's not the case. Brlieved by many but wrong.

Resolution increases 2x in the chrominance channels and 1x (aka not at all) in the luminance channel. Due to the way the human eye works, increase would remain invisible, esp. for monochrome images.

Sensitivity would roughly increase 2x. Because Green is such a dominant part of the spectrum and 50% of pixels are sensitive to green.

Btw, that's the reason why the Bayer sensor is so successful and Foveon wasn't. Because it is very hard to beat.
 
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).
Buy a Df and get it converted to monochrome - there are specialists that do this.
 
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.
Would a colour Df eat into sales of D6xx D8xx.

Would a mono Df allow Nikon to market a mono Df as complimentary to D6xx D8xx : thereby keeping sales of D6xx D8xx constant whilst having decent sales of mono Df.
 
Last edited:
The downside of a B&W sensor is the lost of the 3 separate colour channels!

To get something as basic as good separate of white clouds against a blue sky, as Leica acknowledge, requires red, orange and yellow filters as used with B&W films. You then get an overall contrast change which might not be right for some parts of the image.

Local contrast changes are easy based on Channel Mixer starting with a colour sensor.

More flexibility or more resolution is your call.
 
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).
Buy a Df and get it converted to monochrome - there are specialists that do this.
And what kind of image would you expect to see on the LCD display after taking a photo? And what RAW processing software would you be able to use?
 
Best b&w is developed from color file by yourself.
It would be interesting though if you had 3x the ISO sensitivity and 3x the number of pixels which is what would happen with no color filter array. Today's 24MP sensor would actually be 72MP of pixels with a base ISO of 400 and performance up to ISO ~100,000. Certainly a specialty camera, but perhaps some interesting uses.
 
Best b&w is developed from color file by yourself.
It would be interesting though if you had 3x the ISO sensitivity and 3x the number of pixels which is what would happen with no color filter array. Today's 24MP sensor would actually be 72MP of pixels with a base ISO of 400 and performance up to ISO ~100,000. Certainly a specialty camera, but perhaps some interesting uses.

--
John
Gallery: http://jfriend.smugmug.com
When you convert you use all sensels info, so it is actually 72 sensel info gathered. For producing an in-camera b&w, you'd still need some sort of color array in order to be able to balance hues, since silicon photosites won't respond evenly to different colors. For maker to provide filtering options color capture is required.

Then think about it in present conversion: you have GRgBG... info, then you use that to produce monochrome set of information. Given that most scene areas are not balanced equally in color terms, sensels will collect different amounts of photons. Even if one is blown, the other carry info. That means that actually the b&w DR is much higher than the full color one, likely 1-2stops higher. This is very obvious if you do b&w conversions, areas that have one or two channels clipped still can be used if others or 3rd are not, so common in skies and red yellow flowers, or skintones.

So you control it yourself, not the camera's maker.

--
Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/
Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)
 
Last edited:
Best b&w is developed from color file by yourself.
you had 3x the ISO sensitivity and 3x the number of pixels
That's not the case. Brlieved by many but wrong.

Resolution increases 2x in the chrominance channels and 1x (aka not at all) in the luminance channel. Due to the way the human eye works, increase would remain invisible, esp. for monochrome images.

Sensitivity would roughly increase 2x. Because Green is such a dominant part of the spectrum and 50% of pixels are sensitive to green.

Btw, that's the reason why the Bayer sensor is so successful and Foveon wasn't. Because it is very hard to beat.
 
One does not have to theorize - this experiment has been run. It is called the Leica Monochrome. The sensor is the same as in the M9 (18 MP CCD) except no CFA. You can Goggle the Leica Monochrome and there are comparisons of the difference between the M9 and Monochrome. The resolution will be a true 18 MP on the monochrome. It is at most 9 on the M9 and less in areas that are dominated by red or blue light. The sensitivity is closer to 3 X.

From all the results I saw and most of the reviews I've read there is a vast difference between B&W images produced from the monochrome and the M9 with the monochrome having smoother tonal gradation particularly in the mid tones. I've used an M monochrome. It produces very nice images. Yes you need filters but I've been using filters since 1969 and still use them on my film cameras. Not a big deal. Some years ago I sold my Leica and M lenses and if I had not sold my M lenses I probably would own an Leica monochrome.

Given I have a nice collection of good Nikon AIs glass, if Nikon came out with a monochrome version of the new camera even at 12 mp (it would be a three 12 mp) I would buy it.

Truman

Best b&w is developed from color file by yourself.
you had 3x the ISO sensitivity and 3x the number of pixels
That's not the case. Brlieved by many but wrong.

Resolution increases 2x in the chrominance channels and 1x (aka not at all) in the luminance channel. Due to the way the human eye works, increase would remain invisible, esp. for monochrome images.

Sensitivity would roughly increase 2x. Because Green is such a dominant part of the spectrum and 50% of pixels are sensitive to green.

Btw, that's the reason why the Bayer sensor is so successful and Foveon wasn't. Because it is very hard to beat.
 
When you convert you use all sensels info, so it is actually 72 sensel info gathered. For producing an in-camera b&w, you'd still need some sort of color array in order to be able to balance hues, since silicon photosites won't respond evenly to different colors. For maker to provide filtering options color capture is required.

Then think about it in present conversion: you have GRgBG... info, then you use that to produce monochrome set of information. Given that most scene areas are not balanced equally in color terms, sensels will collect different amounts of photons. Even if one is blown, the other carry info. That means that actually the b&w DR is much higher than the full color one, likely 1-2stops higher. This is very obvious if you do b&w conversions, areas that have one or two channels clipped still can be used if others or 3rd are not, so common in skies and red yellow flowers, or skintones.

So you control it yourself, not the camera's maker.
This is I'd guess the reason why nobody but Leica has yet released a B&W only sensor, there would clearly be advantages in some respects but there would also be a loss of DR in an area(highlights) where digital can still have problems.
 
Actually Not True that only Leica make a B&W digital camera Phase One make the IQ260 Achromatic Back:-


If you go to the site of Murray Fredericks look at his Hector series of photographs shot with an earlier version of the Phase One Back:-


I have seen these prints exhibited and they are nothing short of stunning, one of very few attempts that match the quality of classic silver prints.

Kind Regards,

Oliver
 
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.

Perhaps Nikon could market both. Remember they have two D800's, one with and one without an AA filter. I understand that a colour filter array is a different animal to an AA filter, but if they could develop both they could slot it into a D800 later - perhaps call it a D800Em.

As an aside, this will have echoes from the past because Auntie Em is a character from the Wizard of Oz which, if you remember, went from black and white (sepia anyway) to colour and back.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top