Learning to See in Black and White
A first-thoughts essay on shooting with the Leica Q2 Monochrome…
Let’s begin with some honest questions: Is it worth spending more money to shoot with a Leica? Next question: Is it worth spending a premium on top of the standard Leica premium, to limit yourself to a monochromatic sensor? Let’s think about that!
Please, please, one step at a time. Before I try to dive into the Leica debate, I want to provide some personal context. I have shot with Sony, Fujifilm and predominately Canon for the past six years. I am partial to Canon products, and I love the feeling of holding a robust camera with a substantial lens, typically while I am climbing, mountaineering, or backpacking. To nail down what “genre” I align with most, feels like an unnecessary opportunity to pigeon hole myself. That said, I get most excited when I’m out in the elements, snow in the air, wind numbing my skin, and an ice axe either on my back or in my uphill hand. As an adventure focused photographer, you can start to understand that I am not the typical Leica demographic. Film sounds like a blast, but I’m too cheap to buy rolls for a Leica M6 every other day. Street photography is kind of like going to a therapist. When I do it, it feels great, and I should probably do it a lot more…but I don’t. I do my best to find places that make me feel really small, alone, and sometimes afraid. This is where I feel creative.
So I like big ugly cameras with big ugly lenses, and I like to take my gear where it’s wet and cold. In a lot of ways, the idea of bringing a Leica to this space is like wearing a tuxedo to climb Denali. For me, is it worth it to buy a Leica? My short and sweet answer is, who cares, and I think regardless of where you shoot, you should consider the idea of a Leica from an alternative point of view. I’ll repeat what every serious photographer should already know, your gear won’t make you a better photographer. You should never expect buying a Leica to be worth it from a utilitarian perspective. It is a gadget that feels absolutely incredible, looks as sharp as a finely German-crafted piece of equipment should, and does a set of jobs exceptionally well. Every camera I’ve ever shot before using a Leica did the job, though, and with a much lower price tag, and therefore consequence, in an environment not typically conducive to luxury. I caution you to reconsider the question of whether buying a Leica is worth it, and instead to consider what you want out of photography. Finally, take your answers to this question, and balance them against your budget and priorities. I’ll buy a plane ticket before any piece of gear enters my bag ten out of ten times.
You may not find my answer to our first question very satisfying, so let’s dig into question two: is it worth paying a premium to shoot on a monochromatic sensor?
I want to approach this from a couple of angles, the first being the technical angle. Why would you buy a camera that only has a monochromatic sensor, irrespective of price? The answer is really…black and white… A monochromatic sensor provides the highest level of detail, and remarkable sensitivity that manifests as otherworldly ISO performance. Both of these variables are industry leading in the Leica Q2 Monochrome. To help answer the question of whether it’s worth a premium for a monochromatic sensor, I have a few more questions to ask. First, how much value do you place on a clean file with minimal amounts of noise?
When I refer to noise, I am specifically referring to the granular effect caused by increasing the ISO of your camera. For the sake of this article, I will assume you’ve shot at ISO 100 and you’ve shot at ISO 1600. The ISO 100 file is “noise” free because there is no grain introduced by increasing the sensitivity of the sensor. At ISO 1600, though, the file may begin to show grain, and likely an overall loss of detail. This effect continues as the ISO rises.
My second question is how often do you sacrifice shutter speed in order to mitigate your ISO setting? Lastly, how many more usable shots would you have if you could raise your ISO to 25600, maintain a perfectly sharp and low-noise file, and still have the room to push and pull shadows by several stops at a time without severe degradation of your file?
I’m in the weeds, but for good reason. Almost every shot I’ve taken with the Leica Q2 Monochrome fell between ISO 1600 and ISO 12500. At every point in this range, I’ve walked away with the same results. I have highly detailed files with immense room to be pushed and pulled until I feel they resonate with me. Best yet, I’ve found myself skipping a normal step in my workflow. When I shoot with my Canon R5, especially at the start and end of the day, I shoot lower shutter speeds, and worse yet, spend significant time post processing my files to bring the noise down. Regardless of when I’ve been using the Q2 Monochrome, I rarely check what ISO was used. In fact, and this may frustrate the purists out there, I set my ISO to auto with a maximum of 25600, and I know that whatever and whenever I shoot, I don’t need to spend a second eliminating noise in post processing.
So detail and sensitivity fuel a technically near flawless sensor in the Leica Q2 Monochrome, and this might be the lessor of the two most important perspectives we need to consider when asking whether it’s worth paying a premium to shoot strictly in black and white.
I would argue the more valuable aspect of this black and white sensor is the dance it forces you to have with light. Color in photography only became prevalent in the 1970s despite it’s first uses back in the mid 1800s. Yes, color in the 1800s was more like painting over a naturally black and white image, but the path to color photography was there and yet became irrelevant for the majority of the next 100 years. Why? To shoot monochromatically forces a simpler perspective on a scene that cannot be distracted from by color. Removing color, or rather refraining from the introduction of color, acts to force a more compelling composition. You are dancing with light, seeing only how the monochromatic rainbow paints a compelling scene or a muddled mess. While the limitations of color introduction may have extended the time society went without widespread color photography, the compelling nature of a well balanced monochromatic image remains honest, even today. This is all to say that shooting black and white is a chance to experiment, to train your eye to see a scene separate from the colors most of us are born perceiving. I’ve found it entirely addicting, and it’s reinvigorated so much of what I originally loved about photography.
Back to the question at hand, is it worth it to spend a premium for a monochromatic sensor? For me, the answer is a resounding yes. I’ve been struggling with my creativity and direction for the last year - we all have these moments I assume - and this camera has felt like going from a perpetual squint to walking through moments with my proverbial photographic eye wide open.
Over the next year, I’d like to write about the usability of the Q2 form factor, the argument for cameras in the M lineup (if I can ever get my hands on one), and especially the experience shooting high consequence adventure photography with this niche little powerhouse of a camera.
Shoot for the love of it, don’t drown in bottomless well of costs and new tech, and find what makes your heart beat faster to shoot. If you keep these in mind, and honestly consider what will make you take more compelling images, then perhaps you’ll find yourself with a similar experience to the one I’ve outlined above. The Leica Q2 Monochrome has so much to offer, and it is a photographic wonder in the age of new everything, all the time.