Who else is waiting for K 3 Mark 3 MONOCHROME?

Romaner wrote:

MarBa wrote:

Hi everyone,

the images in the Leica review and comments from other convinced me that there is indeed some advantage to Monochrome sensors. You get 2 stops advantage in noise at high ISO .. but at low ISO ... before the noise become a problem and starts "eating" the details ... there is almost no difference. I don't really see that you get more details from Monochrome (I was only looking at the comparison between SL2 and M10M).

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

.. but I would argue that such sensor should NOT be in APS-C "sports" body such as K-3 III but rather in a full-frame K-1. If we got the 41 Mpx FF mono sensor that is in Leica M10M into K-1 .. I would consider it .. if price was right. But I would likely not pay more than about $500 premium over similar color version of K-1.

It would be a nice super low light camera for anything where you need clean B&W image and ISO is above 1600-3200.

Best,

Marek

Yes, K1 Mk. 2 Monochrome and 645z Monochrome would be great cameras! I think that Ricoh/Pentax will consider making them if the K3 Mk. 3 Monochrome will sell well.

I don't think they will ever make Mono camera. Also .. I really think that the price would be quite high ..

I hope they first make K-1 III

Wallace Ross wrote:

No you cant do focus stacking with LF film in any reasonable way but if your doing that with digital then your unlikely to be seeing any benefit of a monochrome sensor either with all the processing.

When the image quality is already so good our of the K3III sensor I just cant see the point of trying to squeeze some potential last few percentage points of detail while limiting yourself to monochrome shooting. If your willing to stack then pixel shifting and capturing the luminance value at every pixel and converting to monochrome should also do the trick.

Again, see samples above. Monochrome sensors have much better detail and much finer grain. Image quality from K3 Mk. 3 is fine, but with mono sensor it will be much better (for me).

MarBa wrote:

Hi everyone,

the images in the Leica review and comments from other convinced me that there is indeed some advantage to Monochrome sensors. You get 2 stops advantage in noise at high ISO .. but at low ISO ... before the noise become a problem and starts "eating" the details ... there is almost no difference. I don't really see that you get more details from Monochrome (I was only looking at the comparison between SL2 and M10M).

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

.. but I would argue that such sensor should NOT be in APS-C "sports" body such as K-3 III but rather in a full-frame K-1. If we got the 41 Mpx FF mono sensor that is in Leica M10M into K-1 .. I would consider it .. if price was right. But I would likely not pay more than about $500 premium over similar color version of K-1.

It would be a nice super low light camera for anything where you need clean B&W image and ISO is above 1600-3200.

Best,

Marek

I agree! The speed, tracking AF etc. are qualities of the K-3 line, but I would not see this the best basis for sensor versions, where liveview does give an advantage and with that probably an articulated screen. If in APS-C then KPm would be perfect. Or GRIIIm. Yes, and K-1m

I like more the idea of Pentax k-1 monochrome rather than k3m3 mono.

36 mpix of k1 monochrome translates into details which are provided by  80 mpix stock sensor and this is full frame, not APS-C.

All monochrome converted

Kobie M-C wrote:

[...] 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.

But since those characteristics are also tied to sensor size, wouldn't a monochrome FF make more sense than a monochrome APS-C?

(No dog in this fight. I wouldn't buy a monochrome--just wondering why, if a person did want one, they wouldn't want it on a FF platform)

Hi,

I've seen the Pentax cameras  you listed on pentaxforums.  How do you think a factory monochrome version of K-1 or K-3 will differ from your converted cameras? You do lose the microlens layer in the conversion process, I guess.

i think it will be interesting to compare the results from your cameras (resolution and sensitivity) and an equivalent new model from Pentax.

iso rivolta wrote:

Hi,

I've seen the Pentax cameras you listed on pentaxforums. How do you think a factory monochrome version of K-1 or K-3 will differ from your converted cameras? You do lose the microlens layer in the conversion process, I guess.

i think it will be interesting to compare the results from your cameras (resolution and sensitivity) and an equivalent new model from Pentax.

Yes, it would be interesting but at the time it is impossible - no stock K-1 or K-3 monochrome are produced.
Theoretically max resolution will not differ comparing my conversion and stock monochrome sensor because both sensors are subjects of physics laws - if sensor has 4000 pix in vertical dimension it can't resolve more.
Difference can exist in sensitivity - microlenses concentrate light into pixel well, the effect can reach up to +200 percent average (2 stop).
Stock monochrome sensor with microlenses should have less reflectivity from sensor surface (not a problem in most cases of debayered sensor).

Medex wrote:

iso rivolta wrote:

Hi,

I've seen the Pentax cameras you listed on pentaxforums. How do you think a factory monochrome version of K-1 or K-3 will differ from your converted cameras? You do lose the microlens layer in the conversion process, I guess.

i think it will be interesting to compare the results from your cameras (resolution and sensitivity) and an equivalent new model from Pentax.

Yes, it would be interesting but at the time it is impossible - no stock K-1 or K-3 monochrome are produced.
Theoretically max resolution will not differ comparing my conversion and stock monochrome sensor because both sensors are subjects of physics laws - if sensor has 4000 pix in vertical dimension it can't resolve more.
Difference can exist in sensitivity - microlenses concentrate light into pixel well, the effect can reach up to +200 percent average (2 stop).
Stock monochrome sensor with microlenses should have less reflectivity from sensor surface (not a problem in most cases of debayered sensor).

Plus a stock monochrome camera will have an output file formatted as such to make subsequent processing one step simpler

Doug

Just a quick question.. when you covert the camera to monochrome and you thus gain some sensitivity, how is metering working? Do you have to constantly dial negative exposure compensation?

Best,

M

MarBa wrote:

Just a quick question.. when you covert the camera to monochrome and you thus gain some sensitivity, how is metering working? Do you have to constantly dial negative exposure compensation?

Best,

M

Probably it depends on the scene you shoot but in general theoretically -0,7 eV should be used instead of 0 eV (for DSLRs). In case of Ricoh GR (or other mirrorless camera) I always use on-screen histogram to properly adjust exposure compensation. And I should notice that sometimes indoor shooting requires +1-1,7 eV compensation. I think it is related to light which is emitted from lamps, e.g. halogen lamps emit continuous spectrum, cheap LEDs emit discrete spectrum.

Medex wrote:

MarBa wrote:

Just a quick question.. when you covert the camera to monochrome and you thus gain some sensitivity, how is metering working? Do you have to constantly dial negative exposure compensation?

Best,

M

Probably it depends on the scene you shoot but in general theoretically -0,7 eV should be used instead of 0 eV (for DSLRs). In case of Ricoh GR (or other mirrorless camera) I always use on-screen histogram to properly adjust exposure compensation. And I should notice that sometimes indoor shooting requires +1-1,7 eV compensation. I think it is related to light which is emitted from lamps, e.g. halogen lamps emit continuous spectrum, cheap LEDs emit discrete spectrum.

At first I thought why would you need compensation?  If the sensor modification lets in more light, then the metering will adjust automatically.  Then I realized that in a DSLR, the imaging sensor and metering sensor are two different things.  Modifying one does not change the other.  In a mirrorless camera things might be different.

Mark Ransom wrote:

Medex wrote:

MarBa wrote:

Just a quick question.. when you covert the camera to monochrome and you thus gain some sensitivity, how is metering working? Do you have to constantly dial negative exposure compensation?

Best,

M

Probably it depends on the scene you shoot but in general theoretically -0,7 eV should be used instead of 0 eV (for DSLRs). In case of Ricoh GR (or other mirrorless camera) I always use on-screen histogram to properly adjust exposure compensation. And I should notice that sometimes indoor shooting requires +1-1,7 eV compensation. I think it is related to light which is emitted from lamps, e.g. halogen lamps emit continuous spectrum, cheap LEDs emit discrete spectrum.

At first I thought why would you need compensation? If the sensor modification lets in more light, then the metering will adjust automatically. Then I realized that in a DSLR, the imaging sensor and metering sensor are two different things. Modifying one does not change the other. In a mirrorless camera things might be different.

Exactly .. unfortunately, Pentax does not have a setting where you could apply some global EV compensation that is there by default. (for example Sony has that - even for different measurement modes - quite nice).

Best,

M

Mark Ransom wrote:

At first I thought why would you need compensation? If the sensor modification lets in more light, then the metering will adjust automatically. Then I realized that in a DSLR, the imaging sensor and metering sensor are two different things. Modifying one does not change the other. In a mirrorless camera things might be different.

Yes, I use both types of monochrome converted cameras - DSLRs and mirrorless. 
All monochrome converted (Some are already sent to customers)

MikeArts wrote:

Medex wrote:

Mark Ransom wrote:

At first I thought why would you need compensation? If the sensor modification lets in more light, then the metering will adjust automatically. Then I realized that in a DSLR, the imaging sensor and metering sensor are two different things. Modifying one does not change the other. In a mirrorless camera things might be different.

Yes, I use both types of monochrome converted cameras - DSLRs and mirrorless.
All monochrome converted (Some are already sent to customers)

I was considering converting my old camera to monochrome, but I was expecting much lower prices. Now considering to do it myself instead. What makes it so expensive for scratch off the CFA layer with a scalpel? Man-hours spent? Two days of work? There're no parts to be replaced / added I suppose.

If this process would be easy every could do it.
Do not use scalpel, sensor will be damaged.
The cheapest alternative I know could be found here:
https://monochromeimaging.com/odering/

MarBa wrote:

Exactly .. unfortunately, Pentax does not have a setting where you could apply some global EV compensation that is there by default. (for example Sony has that - even for different measurement modes - quite nice).

Best,

M

I do not see the reason for global eV compensation because on Pentax bodies you can do it with 1 click operation on demand and there are 3-5 user modes you can save and use when you need/want just turning Mode dial.
On the other way you always can leave eV compensation at the level you choose in some situation, it will not change when camera is turned off / on.

Medex wrote:

MarBa wrote:

Exactly .. unfortunately, Pentax does not have a setting where you could apply some global EV compensation that is there by default. (for example Sony has that - even for different measurement modes - quite nice).

Best,

M

I do not see the reason for global eV compensation because on Pentax bodies you can do it with 1 click operation on demand and there are 3-5 user modes you can save and use when you need/want just turning Mode dial.
On the other way you always can leave eV compensation at the level you choose in some situation, it will not change when camera is turned off / on.

Except ... if you always require -1.5EV, your range on top is now not +/- 5EV.

So .. yes .. I generally agree .. but a global EV correction is a good thing.

Best,

M