Who else is waiting for K 3 Mark 3 MONOCHROME?

I'm so glad that Ricoh/Pentax noticed the need for monochrome camera! Also, this will be the first monochrome camera with IBIS! That means high-quality handheld photos in extremely low light situations!

Also, Jet Black finish will be IDEAL for K3 Mark 3 Monochrome!!!

Well .. is this happening? Or was this more like "wish" list.

I would honestly want to see a comparison of monochrome camera vs B&W conversion from color sensor. When is this actually noticeably better?

The flexibility of converting color to monochrome later is great! Less need for filters.

Best,

M

Well, since a monochrome camera has no color filter array, the image quality, dynamic range and sharpness is vastly superior as is the iso capability with a much lower noise floor compared to a color sensor. You can't replicate those in software.

Kobie M-C wrote:

Well, since a monochrome camera has no color filter array, the image quality, dynamic range and sharpness is vastly superior as is the iso capability with a much lower noise floor compared to a color sensor. You can't replicate those in software.

EXACTLY! Some people just don't understand this. I know that software convertion is more convenient for a lot of people, but there are a lot of color cameras, and VERY few (and VERY expensive) cameras for people who mainly shoot BW and understand the benefits of monochrome sensor. I'm sure that Pentax K 3 Mk. 3 Monochrome will sell very well.

Romaner wrote:

Kobie M-C wrote:

Well, since a monochrome camera has no color filter array, the image quality, dynamic range and sharpness is vastly superior as is the iso capability with a much lower noise floor compared to a color sensor. You can't replicate those in software.

EXACTLY! Some people just don't understand this. I know that software convertion is more convenient for a lot of people, but there are a lot of color cameras, and VERY few (and VERY expensive) cameras for people who mainly shoot BW and understand the benefits of monochrome sensor. I'm sure that Pentax K 3 Mk. 3 Monochrome will sell very well.

Why not lobby one of the mirrorless manufacturers so you could get monochrome right from the viewfinder?

Romaner wrote:

Kobie M-C wrote:

Well, since a monochrome camera has no color filter array, the image quality, dynamic range and sharpness is vastly superior as is the iso capability with a much lower noise floor compared to a color sensor. You can't replicate those in software.

EXACTLY! Some people just don't understand this. I know that software convertion is more convenient for a lot of people, but there are a lot of color cameras, and VERY few (and VERY expensive) cameras for people who mainly shoot BW and understand the benefits of monochrome sensor. I'm sure that Pentax K 3 Mk. 3 Monochrome will sell very well.

In terms of resolution, the image from a monochrome version would be similar with that from a Pixel Shift image (4 frames) converted to monochrome. If you have one of the Pentax cameras with Pixel Shift, you can compare a single image vs Pixel shift, both converted to greyscale, and make an idea about the gain in monochrome resolution.

Of course, the Pixel Shift image will also have an advantage regarding the exposure (4 times longer in total). OTOH, the monochrome version of the camera would have more light for the same exposure time (higher sensitivity). Then you can average 4 such images from the monochrome camera and obtain something likely better than a desaturated Pixel Shift image (for still objects).

RBIV wrote:

Romaner wrote:

Kobie M-C wrote:

Well, since a monochrome camera has no color filter array, the image quality, dynamic range and sharpness is vastly superior as is the iso capability with a much lower noise floor compared to a color sensor. You can't replicate those in software.

EXACTLY! Some people just don't understand this. I know that software convertion is more convenient for a lot of people, but there are a lot of color cameras, and VERY few (and VERY expensive) cameras for people who mainly shoot BW and understand the benefits of monochrome sensor. I'm sure that Pentax K 3 Mk. 3 Monochrome will sell very well.

Why not lobby one of the mirrorless manufacturers so you could get monochrome right from the viewfinder?

I've thought about Fujifilm X Pro Monochrome for years, but it's very unlikely to happen. Also I don't really like mirorless cameras (apart from rangefinders, they are cool) because of permanent usage of the sensor, resulting in more heat and more noise.

K-1III monochrome has more sense.

Absolutely not! I see it as a colossal waste of time and resources.

iso rivolta wrote:

Romaner wrote:

Kobie M-C wrote:

Well, since a monochrome camera has no color filter array, the image quality, dynamic range and sharpness is vastly superior as is the iso capability with a much lower noise floor compared to a color sensor. You can't replicate those in software.

EXACTLY! Some people just don't understand this. I know that software convertion is more convenient for a lot of people, but there are a lot of color cameras, and VERY few (and VERY expensive) cameras for people who mainly shoot BW and understand the benefits of monochrome sensor. I'm sure that Pentax K 3 Mk. 3 Monochrome will sell very well.

In terms of resolution, the image from a monochrome version would be similar with that from a Pixel Shift image (4 frames) converted to monochrome. If you have one of the Pentax cameras with Pixel Shift, you can compare a single image vs Pixel shift, both converted to greyscale, and make an idea about the gain in monochrome resolution.

Of course, the Pixel Shift image will also have an advantage regarding the exposure (4 times longer in total). OTOH, the monochrome version of the camera would have more light for the same exposure time (higher sensitivity). Then you can average 4 such images from the monochrome camera and obtain something likely better than a desaturated Pixel Shift image (for still objects).

What about a monochrome camera that does pixel shift in 1/2 pixel increments?

Doug

PentUp wrote:

Absolutely not! I see it as a colossal waste of time and resources.

As opposed to the combined time that all of us spend on this forum?

Doug

p.s., add 42 smilies to indicate my good humour in this.

DougOB wrote:

iso rivolta wrote:

Romaner wrote:

Kobie M-C wrote:

Well, since a monochrome camera has no color filter array, the image quality, dynamic range and sharpness is vastly superior as is the iso capability with a much lower noise floor compared to a color sensor. You can't replicate those in software.

EXACTLY! Some people just don't understand this. I know that software convertion is more convenient for a lot of people, but there are a lot of color cameras, and VERY few (and VERY expensive) cameras for people who mainly shoot BW and understand the benefits of monochrome sensor. I'm sure that Pentax K 3 Mk. 3 Monochrome will sell very well.

In terms of resolution, the image from a monochrome version would be similar with that from a Pixel Shift image (4 frames) converted to monochrome. If you have one of the Pentax cameras with Pixel Shift, you can compare a single image vs Pixel shift, both converted to greyscale, and make an idea about the gain in monochrome resolution.

Of course, the Pixel Shift image will also have an advantage regarding the exposure (4 times longer in total). OTOH, the monochrome version of the camera would have more light for the same exposure time (higher sensitivity). Then you can average 4 such images from the monochrome camera and obtain something likely better than a desaturated Pixel Shift image (for still objects).

What about a monochrome camera that does pixel shift in 1/2 pixel increments?

Doug

Or making use of composition adjustment function, automatically making high - res "panorama" with fullframe fov in-camera.

PentUp wrote:

Absolutely not! I see it as a colossal waste of time and resources.

What resources? Monochrome sensors are much easier (and should be cheaper) to make!

PentUp wrote:

Absolutely not! I see it as a colossal waste of time and resources.

You're just trying to get more time and resource directed to the Five Fives.  Yes, you are.  Admit it !!   

ogl wrote:

K-1III monochrome has more sense.

Maybe, but with cropped sensor you can get bigger DOF at the same aperture, resulting in lower ISO values. Add IBIS and BSI, and you are up to some seriously good low light shots.

RBIV wrote:

Romaner wrote:

Kobie M-C wrote:

Well, since a monochrome camera has no color filter array, the image quality, dynamic range and sharpness is vastly superior as is the iso capability with a much lower noise floor compared to a color sensor. You can't replicate those in software.

EXACTLY! Some people just don't understand this. I know that software convertion is more convenient for a lot of people, but there are a lot of color cameras, and VERY few (and VERY expensive) cameras for people who mainly shoot BW and understand the benefits of monochrome sensor. I'm sure that Pentax K 3 Mk. 3 Monochrome will sell very well.

Why not lobby one of the mirrorless manufacturers so you could get monochrome right from the viewfinder?

The viewfinder is completely different than a dedicated monochrome image sensor. I can already do monochrome in live view. But it's still a render of a color image with the filter in front of the sensor.

Romaner wrote:

PentUp wrote:

Absolutely not! I see it as a colossal waste of time and resources.

What resources? Monochrome sensors are much easier (and should be cheaper) to make!

IC sensor costs are determined as much by expected volume as intrinsic cost--a quality they share with software costs. Design cost, not production costs, are the main considerations. So unless Sony thinks it can sell as many mono camera chips as color ones (anyone think that?) there is no reason so think that a monochrome chip would be cheaper than a normal color chip.

Then internally for Pentax, one of the main benefits touted for a monochrome version is increased resolution: more pixels, larger files, etc. All of those mean some degree of revision to the cameras imaging engine, the accelerator chip, etc. Plus pulling whatever is going on with the integration between the onboard chip firmware and the camera's firmware and rewriting those interface points. Finally, anything that relies on identifying color blocks or patterns (NR? AF?) would need rewritten. So changing sensor chips is never automatic nor free, and changing the basic nature of the data is worse.

And the people who would have to do that work would be the same people who are currently most likely working on the evolution of the K-3iii's electronics to support a new K-1 and a new K-70/KP, probably significantly delaying those projects. So there are opportunity costs to consider.

All for a few people who'd rather imagine a monochrome wonder, rather than just getting more resolution by using pixel-shift and/or moving to a K-1.

Lothman wrote:

MarBa wrote:

Well .. is this happening? Or was this more like "wish" list.

I would honestly want to see a comparison of monochrome camera vs B&W conversion from color sensor. When is this actually noticeably better?

I also do not see a great benefit, you can google for "Leica monochrome comparison" and find things like this

https://www.reddotforum.com/content/2020/05/bw-iso-showdown-2020-leica-m10-monochrom-vs-m-monochrom-typ-246-vs-m10-p-vs-sl2/

or this blind test:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ez5v5a8MLPA&ab_channel=digiDirect

The flexibility of converting color to monochrome later is great! Less need for filters.

Best,

M

Here I'm also with you. Having the posibility in postprocessing to filter different for the sky than for the skin or the green is a huge advantage of color conversion. So I think a monochrome camera from Pentax would be a mistake, it offers rarely any advantage beside being special.

What about K33 which could be converted to infrared or astro because the user could change the sensor filter in the camera??? That would be really unique.

Why not a Full Spectrum sensor as default ? With dedicated and integrated in body slide-in filters for IR , Astro , ND or UV-IR-Cut (cut UV and IR for usual photography) ? We already have the old K 400-600mm with its integrated rear filters (from the film days). Pentax could do even better, closer to the sensor and part of the default optical path! And Pentax could add its color science to RAW processing taking into account the filter in place (BW/IR/Astro/UV/normal). Cut the costs with the same base camera and open new ways for photography with switchable rear filters.

Another option would be to start only with a Full Spectrum series camera (K3* or K1*) loaded with classical Clip-in filters , or Benro's Aureole multi-filter holder usable even with UWA lenses. This last option even adds CPL and VND to the deal, but only for MILC.

Regards, Fred