Anyone who chooses to thumb through the previous decade’s worth of ULTRAsomething articles will be faced with an incontrovertible truth — that a photo’s technical quality carries little (if any) weight in my evaluation of its acceptability. For me, a photo’s feel will always supersede its fidelity. So it probably seems paradoxical, if not downright criminal, that I have been tasked with testing each iteration of that über-fidelity wonder known as the Leica Monochrom.
The curious fact is that I am, in actuality, a technical guy — complete with an Electrical Engineering degree and a lifetime spent designing and developing electronic music products. So while I do possess the jaunty jargony jive to parse through a camera’s technical merits, I’m also aware they’re only a fraction of the camera’s overall gestalt. And ‘gestalt’ really is the best term to apply to the M10 Monochrom — a camera that relies as much on limitations as on fidelity to create a greater whole. Gone is the modern convenience of autofocus, elaborate AI-infused picture modes, video capabilities, and the ability to record any color other than grey. In its place is an all-new custom-designed 41-megapixel sensor of impeccable ability, and an ergonomic design aesthetic essentially unchanged (because it hasn’t needed to change) since 1954. That’s how you make a nice, hot, steaming bowl of gestalt soup.
This, the third generation of the Monochrom recipe, has inherited the M10 form factor and all the little niceties that product line delivers. It shaves a few mm of bulk off the once bloated digital body, and now features the quietest shutter I’ve heard on a Leica (and I have several old models of analog M and Leica IIIs). As with the second-generation Monochrom, Leica asked me to perform a detailed technical analysis — this time comparing image differences between the new version, its previous incarnation (the Model 246), and the current generation of color M10.
Unfortunately, due to some hiccups in customs, the camera arrived only two days before my scheduled trip to Tokyo. So the time required to perform the technical comparisons would be particularly tight. As the Monochrom’s battery charged, I hastily outlined what sort of controlled photos I would take in an effort to see how much, if any, additional fidelity Leica could squeeze out of this thing.
By the time the battery charged to 80%, Vancouver was engulfed in the darkness of night. I switched on the M10 Monochrom, snickered sardonically as I rotated the new ISO dial to 12,500, walked out onto my balcony and took a single, hand-held shot of the city using one of the slowest lenses I own — the Super-Elmar-M 21mm f/3.4 ASPH. I walked back into the office, popped the SD card into the Mac, fired up Lightroom, and got blown over like that guy in the classic Maxell Tape ad. There was seemingly no way the fidelity of a late night, high ISO shot could be this good. There was precious little noise, scads of detail, and oodles of malleable dynamic range. When I pushed the shadows so hard they resembled daylight, there was no visible banding. And what shadow noise did get amplified was a random, fine, and organic dusting.
I’d taken only one shot, and I already knew I was going to buy it. I didn’t need to run any comparison tests — I needed only to walk around the condo putting Post-It® Notes on things I’d have to sell in order to afford it. But just to be sure, I took the camera on a little walk around Vancouver that night. I checked the images on the Mac when I returned, and immediately opened a new pack of Post-It® Notes. This camera was going to be mine — whatever it cost. I’ve had 4.5 years of hands-on experience with the old Model 246, and I know exactly what it’s capable of and what its images look like — and there is no way it could have done what I’d just asked of the M10 Monochrom. The next night, in the world’s least-scientific comparison, I took the borrowed M10 (color) on a similar walk — it’s a nice camera, but for B&W photography, it wasn’t even in the same league.
I packed my bags for Japan — taking the new M10 Monochrom and two other digital cameras. I could have packed lighter, because the Monochrom was the only camera I used for the entire two weeks in Tokyo — though the other cameras did end up generously donating their SD cards to the Monochrom cause.
There’s nothing quite like photographing with a camera for two straight weeks to know whether or not it’s the camera for me. Even so, my experiences aren’t going to tell you whether or not it’s the camera for you. I can only say that the new M10 Monochrom has eliminated virtually every reservation I had about the old model 246.
My biggest beef with the older Monochrom was its thickness. It never felt right in the hand. The aftermarket Match Technical Thumbs-Up™ helped (as does the requisite soft-release), but its bulk never settled into my palm. And since a firm grip and a wrist strap are the only way I carry a camera, I was often painfully (literally) aware of the camera’s extra size and heft. On my first night out with the new M10 Monochrom, I kept trying to advance the film after each exposure. And for the first week in Tokyo, I would do the same — take a shot, then reach for the non-existent advance lever. Clearly, Leica has finally nailed the body, feel, and handling of a digital M. By the second week, I’d re-trained my thumb to not reach for the “film” lever after every shot — though with the analog and digital bodies now having such similar haptics, this means I’ll probably forget to advance the film when I shoot my analog M bodies.
And speaking of mechanical improvements, this new shutter is quiet. Wicked quiet. Almost leaf-shutter quiet. If discretion is your thing (and electronic shutters aren’t), you will not be disappointed. The whispered snick of its release sound is quieter than any of my M film bodies — by far.
The camera also appears more drizzle-ready than previous digital M cameras. There is no longer an open port for the EVF, nor are there holes for a microphone (since video capabilities have wisely fallen from the spec sheet). And while there has been apocryphal evidence of people gleefully shooting the previous Model 246 in the rain, I was never willing to test fate. If Leica wasn’t assigning an actual IP rating to its weather-sealing, I wasn’t risking it.
But with an assurance from Leica that the new M10 Monochrom will be fine “as long as it’s not raining cats & dogs” (their words), I braved shooting the Monochrom during a few “kittens & puppies” showers. Over time, I’m sure new apocryphal stories will appear on the internet from people claiming to have shot the M10 Monochrom in the driving rain, but here’s the thing: I live in Vancouver — the rainiest city in North America. Our “dogs” are newfies. For all I know, dachshunds might qualify as “dogs” in Wetzler, Germany. Then again, when it’s raining newfies & cougars here in Vancouver, I’m not all that inclined to go out shooting anyway — so it’s a bit of a moot point. Suffice to say, if I’m OK getting a little wet, the new Monochrom probably is too.
I should mention the ISO dial. It rocks. Of course all you M10 owners have known this for the past few years — but it’s new and exciting stuff for us Monochrom shooters. Oh, and the embedded JPG image is actually a useful size now. Thanks, Leica!
If these were the only changes, I’d undoubtedly be drooling over the new M10 Monochrom… and honestly, this is all I expected from Leica — that we would get the new M10 body with, basically, the same tweaked 24-megapixel sensor as before — much like what the M10 got when it was updated from the model 240.
But no. Leica chose to use an entirely new, custom-designed 41-megapixel B&W sensor, and let me tell you… there is NO going back to the M246 for me.
The sensor is simply remarkable. I was initially a bit skeptical of its higher resolution, since the model 246’s old 24-megapixel sensor already has a theoretical limit of approximately 80 lp/mm — far in excess of the 40 lp/mm resolution specs on their MTF lens charts. Leica’s more optically superior lenses (such as my oft-used 21 mm f/3.4) show around 80-90% transmission at 40 lp/mm on center, and about 50-60% in the corners. So it would seem obvious (and it’s visually apparent) that the lenses still have something more to give to an 80 lp/mm sensor. But the 41-megapixel M10 Monochrom’s sensor has a theoretical resolving limit of over 100 lp/mm. Would there still be anything left to extract at that resolution? I’m not one for conducting studio tests, so my experiments were rather rudimentary — I simply locked the cameras to a tripod and used various lenses to photograph distant buildings from my downtown balcony. Basically, when comparing images from the M10 Monochrom and the old M246, I wasn’t able to distinguish any extra detail. But with higher spec’d lenses, the details that did exist most certainly exhibited greater edge sharpness. In practical terms, this means the new M10 Monochrom will allow for ridiculously aggressive cropping, massive prints, or both — provided your lenses are up to the task of feeding this sensor all the data it can handle. It’ll be interesting to see what Leica’s lens designers do now that 40+ megapixels is gradually becoming the new norm.
I was also somewhat concerned all this extra resolution would mean blurrier photos. Granted, since I rarely bother to stop walking when I shoot, all my photos tend to be a bit blurry already — so my trepidation was admittedly rather benign. But what if I did want a sharply focussed photo? Would I be able to handhold the camera and still extract all that extra edge sharpness afforded by the new sensor? Basically, as we know, the higher the resolution, the more susceptible an image is to slight amounts of motion blur. The old “set the shutter speed to 1/f” rule was long obliterated. With the previous generation, I was more inclined to an absolute lower limit of 1/2f. With the M10 Monochrom, 1/4f is the more practical choice for handheld shots with maximum sharpness. Fortunately, this new sensor actually exhibits much better shadow detail, lower noise, and improved high ISO performance, so the cautiously faster shutter speeds are easily compensated.
What’s even more important, is that Leica has somehow managed to increase the camera’s low light fidelity while increasing its pixel density. So, while the M246 and M10 Monochroms both have the same recommended maximum speed of ISO 12500, the new model actually delivers impressive and downright stunning results at this setting. Whereas, frankly, I considered anything north of 6400 to be a “push mode” in the old M246. And speaking of push modes, both cameras allow for an ISO 25,000 push, with the new M10 Monochrom also allowing 50,000 and 100,000 options. I sometimes shot the new M10 Monochrom at ISO 25,000, and was perfectly satisfied. ISO 50,000 is usable if you don’t manhandle the image too truculently in post-processing, but at 100,000 there is simply too much banding for it to be your first choice should you wish to photograph infinite voids in deep space.
It’s still sometimes possible to make patterns appear in the noise floor of an M10 Monochrom file when you rotate or geometrically distort an image. Anyone who’s seen this with either of the earlier Monochroms will continue to see it with the new M10 version. The extent to which these patterns are visible has always been dependent on a RAW converter’s interpolation algorithms. For example, when I use Lightroom to render a file, I see more pattern noise than when I use Exposure 5. The good news is, the M10 Monochrom goes an extra stop or two beyond the M246 before it starts to visibly band, and any noise patterns that do result from geometric distortion are finer and easier to correct. If I’m going to aggressively shove pixels around on a high ISO file, I’ve found that a single application of Photoshop’s Despeckle tool (applied before the editing process) is all that’s required to virtual eliminate any patterns from forming. As mentioned, other RAW converters may minimize the artifact, as does shooting in JPG. It’s a rather minor problem with many workarounds, and anyone shooting with an earlier version of the Monochrom who hasn’t noticed it previously, probably won’t notice it now.
In hopes of making this article appear more fair and balanced, I actually strained a brain muscle trying to think up something ‘negative’ to write. I suppose one thing I find a bit irksome is that the camera’s GPS system requires that the Visoflex electronic finder be attached to the body. This is fine if you’re a Visoflex user. But mine sat on the table in my Tokyo Airbnb the entire time I was out shooting — which means I need to rely on my memory to identify the location of each photograph. And let’s just say I’m not as young as I once was.
At this point, there’s no reason for me to “sell” readers on the advantages of rangefinder cameras for the sort of candid, reactionary photography I prefer. Nor, after two previous iterations of Monochrom, is there any more reason to discuss why shooting a black & white camera is so liberating, and why its images are so much higher fidelity. If you’re not already in agreement, this article won’t convince you. But if you are, then you likely have only one question: “Is the M10 Monochrom the camera of my dreams?”
And the answer to that question depends on how detailed or colourful you dream. If you already have a second generation M246 Monochrom, the decision to update depends on how you answer a few additional questions:
1) Are you reasonably happy with the handling and ergonomics of the M246? If yes, then the M10 Monochrom’s additional benefits (thinner body, dedicated ISO dial, quieter shutter, fewer moisture entry points) might not be important enough to warrant the extra expense. If no, these physical updates alone might just sway you.
2) Do you crop aggressively and print big? If no, you’ll likely see little actual benefit to having a sensor with 75% more pixels than the M246. The old model’s 24-megapixel sensor is excellent, and it already resolves the vast majority of detail provided by Leica’s exceptional lenses. So while the “wow factor” you’ll experience when you view a file at 1:1 resolution is exhilarating, the amount of extra hard drive space and computer processing time you’ll need to shove all those extra pixels around might not be. If you do crop aggressively (guilty) and/or print big, then the M10 Monochrom’s extra pixels (when fronted with a modern, high-calibre lens) will create a noticeably higher fidelity output than a resized version of a similarly cropped M246 file.
3) Do you frequently shoot at night, or in dark spaces, or in areas of very high contrast? If no, the sensor’s ability to extract another stop or two of Zone 1 detail (while simultaneously reducing the amount of visible banding in those zones) probably won’t justify the extra expense for those few times it does matter. You can always add a bit of random noise to the shadows in Photoshop, which will pretty much eliminate any banding or geometric patterns created by rotating or skewing an image. Sure, the old model 246 won’t have the same level of Zone 1 detail as the M10 Monochrom — but technically, there isn’t supposed to be any detail in that zone anyway. However, if you do shoot frequently in the aforementioned conditions, you’ll appreciate making far fewer trips to Photoshop to dither away any banding issues, and you will marvel at being able to push those Zone 1 details comfortably into Zone 2, if not Zone 3.
As far as deciding between the color version of the M10 and the M10 Monochrom, I can only suggest one thing — if you’re even waffling about this, then perhaps you’re not quite the certifiably uncompromising B+W fetishist for whom Leica builds this. Obviously, with the M10 Monochrom you lose the ability to ever shoot in color — and if that matters to you, then none of the M10 Monochrom’s other advantages (i.e. cleaner shadows, better ISO performance, higher resolution) will matter to you nearly as much as seeing blue skies and green trees.
For me and my dreams, the new M10 Monochrom eradicates nearly every grumble I had with the previous model. So if there’s any way at all I can gather enough crap to sell on Craigslist, I’ll be buying one.
©2020 grEGORy simpson
ABOUT THE PHOTOS:
The camera’s image quality is, as you would expect, outstanding. I’ve included only photos taken at night and at high ISO because they’re the sort I believe benefitted the most from the M10 Monochrom’s new sensor.
If you’re looking at these photos and wondering why they don’t exactly showcase all that “image quality” I’m touting, I’ll refer you to the article’s opening paragraph, where I wrote “a photo’s feel will always supersede its fidelity.” When deciding on a camera, the primary dictates are how well the camera handles; how quickly I can get the shot; and how likely it is I can salvage the shot should I not have enough time to achieve proper focus or exposure. It’s the paradox mentioned in the article’s title: the fact I require such a high fidelity machine to succeed as a low-fidelity photographer.
Also, these photos reflect the fact I shoot many types of lenses to convey different moods. Sometimes those moods require a sharp, contrasty lens, and sometimes they require the opposite. So this series features a host of different lenses, including Leica’s 21mm f/3.4 Super-Elmar-M ASPH, 28mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH, and an old 1980’s Canadian 35mm f/2 Summicron. Also represented are a Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 Nokton ASPH, and a Minolta-M Rokkor 28mm f/2.8. How a camera deals with vintage and third-party optics is every bit as important to me as how it deals with the latest tech from Wetzler.
REMINDER: If you find these photos enjoyable or the articles beneficial, please consider making a DONATION to this site’s continuing evolution. As you’ve likely realized, ULTRAsomething is not an aggregator site — serious time and effort go into developing the original content contained within these virtual walls.
Egor, sorry to say I was late to the party but thanks for the write up and pictures. Being a long time film M user who sees the world in b&w and was very late in dipping my toes in the digital world a Ricoh GXR with the M module and doing it all in b&w. I was lucky to be able to try the first version of the Monochrome for a day and fell in love with the files. But I could not afford the upgrade, even though I have a lot of older M lenses to help.
You have me thinking again that I might be able to put something together again, even though I like what I am able to do with my A7s as being able to use it in just about any light or lack of and being able to get along with most of my M lenses. But then it’s only 12 meg’s this was a dangerous page to fine.
Thanks
Hi Bill… ah, yes, the Ricoh GXR. I really loved that little camera, and shot a lot of great photos with it (caveat: ‘great’ is, of course, a subjective term). I was quite sorry to see Ricoh abandon the format. I’d be first in line if they ever decided to resurrect it, though I know they won’t.
The new M10M continues to delight me. Then again, my old M film bodies continue to delight me, too. Truth be told, I’m also still delighted with the 2015 M246 Monochrom… though I will *definitely* need to sell that in order to help replenish the massive hole left by the M10M purchase. :-p
Very nice article and photos( with a few words i had to look up in the dictionary to understand, )
( It doesn’t often happen to me)
I use the M9M right now, I also owned the 246 ( too bulky although I thought very highly of it). The M10 M seems like a great camera although I wish the it only had 24 MG ( 40 is too much for almost everyone+ as you said more difficult to focus under 4000.
I also wish you showed day light photos as this camera tends to blow out highlights
The M9M with all it’s limitation is a great b\w camera and as Thorstan says: A camera with character
Thans Danny
If you had to recommend one lens for this camera what would it be? if 2 which 2? street photography mainly, some portraits. Sensible price lenses preferred.
I would *never* be so bold as to recommend a lens to someone — unless I knew them VERY well (and maybe not even then). 😉
The fact is, focal length choice is a very personal matter, as is the optical characteristics of a lens. What’s ‘ideal’ for one photographer might be ‘unusable’ to another — but neither is right nor wrong. In general, if you want to extract the maximum amount of data from the sensor, you need a lens that’s capable of it. Leica’s 21mm 3.4 is up to the task, but that might not qualify as a ‘sensible price.’ Although I haven’t tested it on the M10M (though I did test it on the M246), I have no doubt that Leica’s 50mm Summicron APO would yield spectacular results. That’s even less ‘sensibly’ priced.
If squeezing every drop of resolution from the sensor isn’t that important to you (and it is definitely NOT important to me), then you get to choose lenses based on how they ‘look.’ I have lots of different lenses that yield all sorts of different looks, and choose the lens I want for the subject I plan to shoot. Many of these lenses were quite inexpensive; a couple weren’t. The three lenses I use the most on my M10M are 1) Leica 21mm f/3.4 ; 2) Vintage (v4) Leica 35mm f/2 ; Vintage Minolta 28mm f/2.8… I have a Leica 28 f/2 Summicron, which is technically a “better” lens, but I’m actually more fond of the way the Minolta looks, which proves my point: it all depends on what you’re after. 90% of what I shoot is probably at either a 21 or 28 focal length… the 35 is a ‘telephoto’ for me. 😉
Thanks for your article….I’ve been looking at the M10 for some weeks now but something you said about the quality of lenses strapped onto the front of an M10 Monochrom caught my attention.
I have been shooting B&W film exclusively since 1968, Nikon F’s, Olympus, Cannon etc etc and in the 1990’s my first and only Leica M6. I still use it all the time plus a medium format Rollei.
I can no longer use my dark room (moved to smaller house) so I have been scanning the negs and then printing digitally. Now I think the time has come to move completely to Digital tech. It’s one of the most difficult choices I’ve ever had to make!
The Monochrom M10 looks like it will do the business. But will my lenses?
I have an Elmar 90mm F1:4 and an Elmar 55mm F2:4 is the M10 pointless with these lenses, or should I buy your M246?
Let me know your thoughts.
Cheers
William
“Pointless” is a relative term. The extra resolution probably isn’t going to make a whole lotta difference with vintage lenses. If you shoot with ancient glass, then squint and take a shot of tequila while you edit, then *perhaps* you might convince yourself you see some extra micro contrast, but it could just be the worm. Clean and useful dynamic range is a different matter. The M246 was already quite good in this regard, but the M10M seems to gain about a stop of usable shadow detail. Then again, that’s another advantage that can be lens-dependent (since I’ve found a lot of older vintage lenses are less contrasty… which I actually like). Plus, the higher the resolution, the more likely you’ll see tiny bits of camera-shake-related blur when you zoom in on your images. Not that this matters in the least (assuming you print at normal sizes). But it can be disheartening if you expect perfection from a hand-held 90mm 41 megapixel shot. For me, the M10M was worth the upgrade (though I think I would have preferred they kept it at 24 mpix). Obviously, I don’t know what you shoot or how you shoot if. If you have good technique and use a tripod (two things I’m alergic too), and if you want to give yourself a really good excuse to invest in a very expensive new Leica lens at some point in the future, then the M10M is worth it. But so is the M246. 😉
I will add a couple things:
1) You mentioned moving completely to digital tech. Remember: just because you start shooting digital doesn’t mean you have to stop shooting film. I shoot both. Happily. It’s like painting with oil vs drawing with chalks. One does not negate the use of the other — they look completely different, and what you choose to render with them is determined by the media you choose.
2) Everything you know about exposure and what a proper ‘negative’ (i.e. ‘raw image’) should look like will be turned upside down. Film is very forgiving in the highlights (but is mush in the shadows). The Monochrom is the opposite. It is very unforgiving of ANY overexposure. So your first forays will result in massively clipped, unrecoverable highlights. Once you realize that a Monochrom raw file that looks way WAY WAAAAY too dark is actually “properly” exposed, and that the shadows lift beautifully into the mid-tones, you’ll be on your way to Monochrom nirvana. This makes shooting with any Monochrom very different than both Film and Color digital (which is a bit more forgiving of the highlights)… but for B&W photography there is no equal.
Good luck with your pondering.
Thanks for your generous response, I have bought the Tequila.
As I mentioned I use film (always have done) and did my own printing up to 16 x 20, until I lost my D Room, now I develop the film and then scan the negs to Photoshop or Lightroom and print on an Epson A3. I never use a tripod, camera under my jacket.
I make alot of night pictures…..I love shooting at night….that’s why I paid so much attention to your comments, you clearly like the same kind of results as I do.
What would you do?
William
Well, since I get to spend YOUR money, and since you love shooting at night, I’d probably go for the M10M — just for the extra stop of shadow detail. Then again, a previous generation Monochrom would save you some bucks (not to mention all the extra hard drive space you save). Either camera will blow away ISO 3200 speed film at night, and either will print 16×20 without breaking a sweat. That said, it’s not like the M10M will look *worse* with vintage lenses than the M246. So other than the added cost and the need for a beefier computer processor to push all those pixels around (and the hard drive space to store them), there’s not really any downside to the M10M. It’s just a matter of ‘is the upside worth those costs?’ Only you can answer that.
Many thanks….I think I’m straightened out now
very best wishes
William
Another way to look at this is in stages:
I got the MM (first version) because it blew me away for its ability to shoot at 5000 ISO hand held. I found shots that weren’t previously possible. In daylight, printed up to 17 x 22 and it was just superb. Felt like medium format quality in a small package – as it held up well in comparison to larger digital backs. But the MM can suffer from blown highlights, and the resolution, while fine, doesn’t leave a lot of room for cropping and still printing large.
The M246 has a bit more resolution, probably helps for crops, and more range. Just before M10M, people were saying it had more range, and was pretty exceptional.
The M10M has yet more resolution, a serious bump now, allowing say for 50% crops (nice, allows one to use just one lens…), and yet more range and higher ISO capabilities. It looks superb. Doing my best to resist. Plus its electronics are more sorted, simpler operation.
Maybe consider these as very good, exceptional and then… superb? I’m kind of eager for the dynamic range of the M10M, and the extra resolution. The extra ISO (say up to 25000) is just icing on the cake!
I managed to get a secondhand one for 5K with virtually no use in NM condition. Fantastic camera and I have shot pure black and white for over a month which has been curiously liberating.
Thanks for this review of the M10 Monochrom. I did find it useful, and have made a donation. I hope it goes toward buying you this camera!
Hi!
When you imported the M10M files into Lightroom did you notice that it auto applies a tone curve? I looked around for a camera profile to remove this but I haven’t been able to find it.
Would you mind sharing how you overcame this automated “feature?”
Thank you! David
Hi David:
That gentle S-curve is built-in to the Monochrom’s RAW Profile used by LR. Personally, I’m fine with it because I always manually tweak the tone curve of any image that matters — so the S-curve is nice for making ‘virtual’ contact sheets on import, since it gives a good and generally balanced interpretation of the image. That said, you can create any RAW profile you want, and have it override the camera’s RAW profile on import. It’s been several years since I’ve bothered to do this, but I *think* it’s handled in the Preferences window (Presets tab), where you can check “Override global setting for specific cameras”, and then specify exactly how you want your raw profile to look upon import.
After a couple of years with the M10M do you have any particular preference: it versus film ?
(And, your PayPal link doesn’t allow donations from, at least, Singapore anymore.)
Hmmm… tough question. The thing is, I really and truly view digital and film as two entirely different mediums — almost as different as sculpting and painting. So it’s hard to use the word “preference”. In general, aesthetically, I will always prefer the look of film for the type of photos I most like to take. But if fidelity matters; if cropping matters; if low light performance matters; if knowing I got the shot matters; and if “coverage” matters, then I will grab the monochrom. But for everyday life, where mood and feel matter, I grab a film camera. The Monochrom did once offer the additional advantage of “simplicity and convenience” over film, but I reduced the gap substantially the last couple of years, by setting up a dedicated station for scanning (photographing) negatives, so “scanning” now takes only about 5 minutes/roll… sure, there’s the development time, but I’ve streamlined that process, as well. All that said, if I could only own ONE camera, it would be the Monochrom — even if I did take 90% of my photos on film this year.
Thank you very much for your insight, which I much appreciated.