B&W in camera or post processing?

[Ripcord]

Are there any differences between taking a camera in B&W and taking in color (raw/jpeg) and making it B&W in post processing?

which one is better?

[ilguercio]

Why would you want to have less information in your picture?

[Ripcord]

sometimes the some pictures looks good in B&W

Just curious to know the differences

[ilguercio]

You don't get it, i asked why on earth would you want to have a straight out of camera B&W picture instead of having a RAW file to play with.
RAW is always better, if you don't mind file size.

[Ripcord]

now I got your point. Thanks for the answer 

[AnotherDave]

This does depend on if you're taking a B&W picture OR if you're intention is to make a picture GREYSCALE.

You could, for example, shoot B&W with a red, blue, or green filter on to make different details POP!  If you are shooting in RAW, the difference between favoring one color digital versus with a filter are minimal - and probably best kept digital.

If you are shooting h.264, it would be best to shoot in greyscale is that is your intention - especially if you want to favor one color over another.

[Ripcord]

thank you Dave for the detailed answer

[ItsMeLenny]

Colour filters are to an extent redundant as the camera can do them in camera when shooting black and white.

[mageye]

Some things (such as filters) will change what the sensor receives allowing you to capture the detail or balance of detail that you may prefer.

Here are some examples of such filters and the effect they have on the recorded image:

http://www.leefilters.com/index.php/camera/blackwhite

However you record your image you will still want to stick with RAW. There is obviously lots that can be done in post. In most cases, when it comes to capturing an image; more (information) is better.

[Ripcord]

Took some pictures in RAW and did some post processing work to change B&W and was really happy