Digital BW, The Print

The problem is that the Bayer filter is an integral part of the sensor 
package, sandwiched under the microlens array.

So you're talking about a mono-only sensor, which wouldn't be cheap as 
there wouldn't be a high demand.

If you want ultimate mono quality, how about a medium format scanning back 
in mono mode?


In article <NABBLIJOIFAICKBIEPJJGEPPEHAB.darkroom@...>, 
darkroom@... (Austin Franklin) wrote:

> Bob,
> 
> > =Why are they better? Well, having no film grain
> 
> That depends on the film.  Slower films, like 160 or lower, don't show 
> much
> grain, if at all, with 4k scanners.
> 
> > or grain
> > =aliasing,
> 
> That's a scanner/film issue that I don't have.
> 
> > no 'pepper grain' microbubbles in the film,
> 
> Never seen that.  I haven't even heard of that one.
> 
> > no dirt
> > =on the film, no film processing deposits,
> 
> Never have that problem...but you do have that nasty old dust on the 
> sensor
> issue to contend with...
> 
> > no scanner depth of
> > =field problems
> 
> I don't have those either, and obviously, that's a scanner dependant 
> issue.
> 
> I understand what you're saying, and for you, obviously, your happy with
> what you've got.  But, don't believe that the issues you had, everyone 
> has,
> because I, and many, simply don't.
> 
> But, to bring it on topic, what about B&W?  You have to convert that 
> nasty
> old Bayer pattern RGB data to grayscale if you want grayscale.  That's 
> going
> to really give you a lot of information loss.  I really wish they sold 
> these
> cameras without the Bayer filter...with just a neutral density filter, 
> so it
> gave TRUE grayscale images.  No Bayer pattern processing...and I'd bet 
> the
> images would be pretty damn good in fact.  Surely a hell of a lot better
> than Bayer pattern images converted!
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Austin