# narrowing down my choices for a MILC



## pixmedic (Jan 30, 2014)

I have been contemplating getting a mirrorless camera for some time now, but honestly, the choices are dizzying. 
I want something we can drag around to parks and stuff to take pics of the dog and kid with. 
I think i am just about at the stage where i am serious enough to actually spend the money.
My requirements are pretty simple.
1: APS-C sensor
2: hotshoe mount
3: around $600 (used/refurb is fine)
I had originally wanted a viewfinder as well, but that really narrowed my options down to very little in my price range. 
brunerww helped me by compiling a list that fit my requirements, and wasn't too outdated. 

Fuji x-a1
samsung NX300
sony NEX 5T
fuji x-M1

I have been leaning slightly towards the samsung, only because we have a samsung wb150 P&S and have been very happy with it. 
anyone own any of these cameras that can give me some insight on them? any other cameras in the $600ish range that i missed?
I also need to find a list of available lenses for these. i don't really need a ton of choices since it will just be for casual use.


----------



## MGRPhoto (Jan 30, 2014)

I just went through this same decision making process with the same simple criteria. The Sony NEX 5t doesn't have a hotshoe mount so that was out for me. I ended up with the NX300 w/18-55 OIS for no real particular reason. I had found a used Samsung SEF-42A flash for a good price (I definitely wanted a full size native flash) and the NX300 was on sale so the overall price was significantly cheaper than the Fuji X-M1. I couldn't find either camera at a store to play with so I just went with the Samsung. I really like it but the image quality isn't all that impressive. I might pick up the X-M1 just to do a comparison.


----------



## macintoshsauce (Jan 30, 2014)

With your budget I'd get a X-M1.  The key is all that Fujinon glass that you can get later on.


----------



## MGRPhoto (Jan 30, 2014)

We don't know how good Samsung's high end glass is going to be yet since they only have one *S* lens and it isn't available yet. Looks like a pretty cool offering though being f/2 at the wide end instead of f/2.8. 16-50mm f/2-2.8 
That tiny 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 is going to be an awesome walk around lens as well. That a big range for a tiny lens.
But I'd agree if you want the offering that has higher quality at the moment and a bigger offering of glass (much higher quality glass) then definitely go with the Fuji. If you're looking for more of a gadget and image quality isn't quite as important I'd suggest the Samsung.


----------



## brunerww (Jan 31, 2014)

Any of them are going to meet your basic requirement of a high quality family camera - and I know you're leaning toward the Samsung because of your positive experience with the WB-150 - but all of that said, if you can swing the $645 X-M1, I would recommend it for the quality and variety of Fuji lenses and the color rendition of X-trans.

If I were in the market for an APS-C still camera, I would get a Fuji-X.

Good luck!

Bill


----------



## jaomul (Jan 31, 2014)

Is there any reason for requiring aps-c sensor. It's just m4/3rds opens up so much more with very little hit in quality?


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 31, 2014)

jaomul said:


> Is there any reason for requiring aps-c sensor. It's just m4/3rds opens up so much more with very little hit in quality?



Mostly to get the extra little bit of low light performance the larger sensor will provide. Unless im wrong about that. Is there a m4/3 system in my price range that is that much better than what i have listed that its worth considering? What will the advantage be for adding another half dozen systems to my choices if the performance is about the same? 

I would be open to a m4/3 suggestion, but there would have to be some significant advantage over whats on my list now.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 31, 2014)

Narrowing down your choices? Wow.. that's arrogant. Man.. I can't believe this was posted by an OP no less. I mean take about a completely inappropriate topic... 

Umm.. wait.. MIL*C

*Whoops, nevermind.. my mistake.. lol. Nothing to see here people. Move along.. move along..


----------



## jaomul (Jan 31, 2014)

pixmedic said:


> jaomul said:
> 
> 
> > Is there any reason for requiring aps-c sensor. It's just m4/3rds opens up so much more with very little hit in quality?
> ...



While I can't compare the ones you have listed to the Olympus EPL5 I own I will say it is almost as good as my Nikon d7100 until really high iso. I would say it has excellent low light ability. I picked this system for size. The fact that it had some excellent small lenses helps. I am working now. I will post examples later if you want them.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 31, 2014)

Fuji has long been a very good lens maker, in lenses of many sizes, for 8x10, 4x5, medium format (for their own cameras and for Hasselblad), 35mm SLR and Hassy wide-format 35mm panoramic, and now, their own APS-C digital cameras...


----------



## MGRPhoto (Jan 31, 2014)

jaomul said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > jaomul said:
> ...



The EP 5 generation will compete with some of the CSC models but not something like a D7100. The E-P5 and the NX300 are about on par with each other where the NEX 5t is about 2/3 of a stop better.


----------



## jaomul (Jan 31, 2014)

MGRPhoto said:


> jaomul said:
> 
> 
> > pixmedic said:
> ...



Have you used both the Nikon d7100 and EPL-5?


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 31, 2014)

I have a D7100, but im not looking for a mirrorless to compete with it. 
i am just looking for something compact enough to easily carry around.
something my wife can stick in her purse when we go to the park or zoo.


----------



## jaomul (Jan 31, 2014)

To OP, the crazy high iso shots are put in only to show the camera can get a shot (albeit very grainy) where some dslrs would not. At the regular iso valuse 1600 or less and 3200 with a bit of care, the Olympus is in my opinion excellent, *almost*&#8203; as good as the d7100
EPL-5

#1 @ iso 640



Kane by jaomul, on Flickr

#2@iso 1250



paris Arc triomphe stairs by jaomul, on Flickr

#3 @iso 2500



Paris by night by jaomul, on Flickr

#4@iso 12800



Brawl off the ball event (13) by jaomul, on Flickr

#5@iso 25600



Brawl off the ball event (18) by jaomul, on Flickr

#6@iso1000



paris champs concorde view by jaomul, on Flickr


----------



## runnah (Jan 31, 2014)

What about the Canon EOS M? Seems pretty cool and it comes in white.


----------



## jaomul (Jan 31, 2014)

pixmedic said:


> I have a D7100, but im not looking for a mirrorless to compete with it.
> i am just looking for something compact enough to easily carry around.
> something my wife can stick in her purse when we go to the park or zoo.



I have the d7100 and use the EPL5 exactly for that. Something light and easy to carry. Its not your only option, there are many, example given just as a reference


----------



## Ron Evers (Jan 31, 2014)

I too was wondering about the APS-C restriction but let it be.  However, I will now also give an example of a m4/3 low light shot with an Olympus E-M5.  

ISO 2000

View attachment 65704


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 31, 2014)

I think the E-M5 is out of my price range of $600 with a lens. 
I don't know why there is such surprise about me wanting a particular feature.  
doesn't everyone that is serious about buying a camera decide what features they really want in order to narrow down the choices?
no one even blinked about me requiring a hotshoe mount, but wanting an aps-c sensor is somehow weird. 

If my budget was higher, there would be better m4/3 options, like the E-M5. Or, you know...a Leica. 
But for the budget I have set, I really think the cameras I have listed are pretty good choices. 
I suppose i can look around and see if there are any E-M5 body/lens combos on amazon or ebay at the $600 mark, but so far I am seeing body's alone for $600+, putting that camera outside of my set budget. 

_*Could *_I budget more money? yea. 
am I _*going*_ to? maybe +/- $50 or something like that, but otherwise no.

now, if anyone has any options within my budget that I have missed that might be a better camera system, i am all for looking into it.


----------



## jaomul (Jan 31, 2014)

Sorry Pixmedic. I only asked if you were set on aps-c because there was an option I knew that had a hotshoe and was in the price range. Certainly wasn't trying to push a product. 
Bowing out.


----------



## MGRPhoto (Jan 31, 2014)

jaomul said:


> MGRPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > jaomul said:
> ...



No I've used the E-P5 which I believe is close enough to the E-PL5 to make a valid comparison and my experience is that it's accurate to what dxomark shows as being around 1 to 1 1/3 stops behind the D7100. The NEX 5t falls right in the middle and as I said the NX300 has about the same performance as the E-P5. I haven't had a chance to use the Fuji X-M1 and it hasn't been tested on dxomark either but I'd really love to get my hands on one.


----------



## Ron Evers (Jan 31, 2014)

pixmedic said:


> I think the E-M5 is out of my price range of $600 with a lens.
> I don't know why there is such surprise about me wanting a particular feature.
> doesn't everyone that is serious about buying a camera decide what features they really want in order to narrow down the choices?
> no one even blinked about me requiring a hotshoe mount, but wanting an aps-c sensor is somehow weird.
> ...



I posted my example only because it was my thought that m4/3 was being dismissed in this thread.  I acknowledge the E-M5 was out of the price range you specified but wanted to further demonstrate that m4/3 cameras were capable of delivering quality @ higher ISO not exclusive to larger sensors.


----------



## MGRPhoto (Jan 31, 2014)

Ron Evers said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > I think the E-M5 is out of my price range of $600 with a lens.
> ...



I'm not sure what advantages an E-PL5 or something along those lines would have over a Fuji X-M1 or even X-A1? Great lens selection with what should be a much better performing sensor the either the same money as the E-PL5 or less money than the E-P5. As I said though if picture quality is of central concern then I would scratch the Samsung off the list.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 31, 2014)

Fujifilm X-M1 | Sans Mirror ? mirrorless, interchangeable lens cameras | Thom Hogan


Fujifilm X-A1 Review | Sans Mirror ? mirrorless, interchangeable lens cameras | Thom Hogan


Sony NEX-5 Review | Sans Mirror ? mirrorless, interchangeable lens cameras | Thom Hogan

Maybe I am biased: I bought the Fuji S1 Pro, S2 Pro, and S5 Pro d-slr cameras. To me, the COLOR ideas that Fuji has had over the years have all been outstanding. THere's something about those greens wirth the extra added yellow, and the slightly-too-warm skin tones that makes Fuji's color palette just almost irresistably beautiful. I think of SOny as cool, and neutral, and Nikon-like. I think of Canon as fake and digital and excessively yellow and cheezy. I think of Fuji as Monet, or Renoir, and with lots of white wine and cheese and fluffy bread and afternoon naps and so on...it's an emotional response to color that Fuji has NAILED, where the competition has been about hitting the Pop Photo Color Accuracy metric....

I dunno...I reallly think Fuji has something that nobody else has quite equalled. Olympus seems close. Canon and Nikon seem miles away, on another planet almost.


----------



## brunerww (Jan 31, 2014)

Derrel said:


> I dunno...I reallly think Fuji has something that nobody else has quite equalled. Olympus seems close. Canon and Nikon seem miles away, on another planet almost.



I didn't say it this well, but this is what I meant when I referred to the X-Trans color filter array as the one of the reasons to choose the X-M1 - I have been impressed by the color in just about every JPEG I've seen from this sensor, and even more impressed with the RAW.

In my view, at $649, the X-M1 meets all the criteria and is the best value-for-money camera on the list.

Cheers,

Bill


----------

