Well, a few months ago, I hocked a kidney and got a Leica M10 Monochrom.
From shooting it so far, I believe the advantages they tout about a monochrome sensor.
With no bayer filter on it, you get more light directly on the sensor, and it can make them into a LOW light monster. I've found that to be true so far.
This thing can also give me useable images at ISO of 50K and at 100K...the grains are there, but it often looks like film grain....but you can get very usable images at very high ISOs regularly.
This has to to, I think, with the various green, red and blue filters on the color array blocking some light hitting the sensor...that is missing on the bare sensor on monochrome shooters?
It seems a bit sharper too...I don't remember what causes this exactly...maybe some sort of anti-aliasing that a color filtered sensor needs?
As I understand it, this is missing on the monochrome sensor.
So, there appears to be some distinct advantages of having a pure sensor without the color filter array on top of it affecting light before it hits the sensor itself.
Yes, you do have to watch to make sure you don't blow your highlights out, but if you've ever shot color negative film, you're used to this...not that big a deal.
So, expose to keep your highlights sane....and so far, I've found I have HUGE latitude in post to bring up and recover shadows if need be.
The contrast on the camera is amazing too, and that's even with a lens that's not $$$ like most Leica stuff.
I started with a voigtlander Ultron f/2 lens, I keep a yellow filter on it at all times and so far, it has really changed my views on how I shoot images.
I"m starring to train myself to "see" scenes in terms of different levels of luminance...and learning to try to ignore color to see the luminance.
It is very different but fun to learn so far.
I know it is new to me, but lately I'm really starting to think Paul Simon had it wrong....I"m starting to think the world looks better in Black and White!!!
cayenne