Is 4/3 and mirrorless or large sensor compact better quality?

[crabbytech]

i like the pens more than the gf3 and based on reviews so do many people. but still, thats a good price?

the pl3 with single lens kit is about $550 au.

[2SHY]

I think the Olympus jpeg's render better than the GF3. You would have to use RAW and convert into JPEG. Your choice though.

NEX5N is due for replacement and does have DSLR quality as the sensor size is APS-C meaning larger lens and more light into the larger sensor meaning better quality images. Your choice, though.

[crabbytech]

i considered the nex5n. to be honest though from what ive seen there isnt a whole lot of difference in 4/3 to apsc all things being equal. i would imagine if you are printing poster size prints then perhaps, but i think then one would need a serious full size like a d1. fair comment? (im not an expert clearly).

i was thinking of going with the pm1/pl3 so i could go down the glass path and upgrade to omd later on.

i think its amazing what you can do now days with such a small camera. i think a nice 20mm prime would turn the pen into a great point n shoot alternative.

[hlokk]

Thing I meant to post before:

Originally Posted by crabbytech

so what would make more sense for $500, a new low end mirroless, or a 4 year old high end compact dslr with a couple of lenses?

im thinking around $2-300 for a used dslr body, any suggestions in that price bracket?

Not sure what you quite definte as a compact SLR? The Canon 1000d or 600d-ish series are still not that compact compared to MFT cameras. The 40d-60d series even less so. For the "couple of lenses" for that price, you're probably only going to get kit lenses and a 50/1.8. None are quite compact.


If you're needing something smallish with good image quality then the MFT's will suit well. The image quality is pretty good on them and despite the smaller sensor, the high ISO ability may even be better. My EPL3 is better at ISO1600 than my 60d...

As for suitable for print. Well, for one it depends how large you are looking to print. Most MFT's are 12MP for example. Like any interchangable lens system, to get the best sharpness you're probably looking at expensive lenses.
The kit lenses on any interchangeable lens camera (dslr or mft) are not super fast, but the IS that both will have increases your ability to hand hold in low light.

However, on a budget, something like a S100 has a F2 lense AND IS. This is a truly pocketable camera. You will be able to handhold it in lower light at any given ISO (but obviously ISO performance wont be as good). The wider lens will allow you to use a lower ISO and freeze motion better in low light too. No IS will freeze subject motion. To get fast, wide or normal lenses on either dslrs or mft's isnt cheap unfortunately.
For low light shots with a tripod (or a gorillapod on a tree or something), then the low light performance may not matter as much as portaa

So what sort of low light shooting do you need to do? Its hard to recommend a system when your exact needs are a bit flexible (or unknown) .






Re last post: The NEX's seem pretty good, and unlike a lot of camera manufacturers they can get their act together and get focus peaking! Sony managed to fit in an APS-C sensor in a pretty small body too. However, lens choice is not as vast. Its worth having a look if what is available suits your needs. With MFT, at least there are two manufacturers producing lenses. We're starting to see some pretty good primes now, and finally a 2.8 zoom (though personally, I think the range of primes that are only 2.8 is dumb). Panasonic make a nice pancake 20mm 1.7 which is a great lens (even if not as good as the new fancy-ass olympus primes or kit zooms at focusing in low light on my Olympus body).