Which Camera...Nikon D5300, D7100, Olympus OM-D EM-10, OM-D E-M5?

[Pondeleonce]

I'm looking for a versatile beginnerish camera as you can clearly infer by my price range. With that being said my main interests lie mostly in street photography, but some scenary, and close-mid range shots of still-nature would be nice as well. I really enjoy the feel of the D5300, while I tend to think the D7100 is a tad clunkier, which I think I could get used to. On the other hand, the OM-D EM-5 feels nice with the extra grip, but the OM-D EM-10, while I haven't held it with an external grip, feels a bit miniature in my hands. I really can't get this DSLR vs Mirrorless battle out of my head even though I shouldn't let it distract me so much from diving into another piece of equipment (Although I definitely have some more valid reasons, for example below)


I've probably looked at all of the pros and cons to each in the book, but can't seem to come to a decision. I had a Nikon D5000 a couple years back until it was stolen from me, but I didn't collect a lot of lenses, so I began to explore the option of a mirrorless camera. Which ones might perform better on the dime and what lenses would you recommend with them? I have definitely been eyeing some 35mm lenses for the DSLR's, but don't know much about Olympus lenses, or the possible benefits of using converters to use other company lenses. Please help me decide, and possibly give me some clearer insight into which might be a better fit for me. Thanks!

 

[agp]

From your list, I vote for D7100. Nikon has a large lens selection, which is a big pro should you want to upgrade to a camera that is more than a "beginnerish camera" in the future. It's also a pro because quality lens is... better.

However, if size is a concern, look into the X-T1 and A7.

 

[Msteelio91]

I'll second the D7100

 

[goodguy]

D7100 hands down!!!

 

[The_Traveler]

With that being said my main interests lie mostly in street photography,

You can do street photography with a dSLR, I did it for years starting with a D70 and ending up with D700 and 24-70, a physically big - and obtrusive - combination.
About 15 months ago I switched to an Olympus OMD EM 5 (with the grip) and within 3 months I sold all my Nikon equipment (2 bodies, 6 lenses + stuff) because it was going unused.
A mirrorless with good lenses is incomparably better for street photography than any large camera, even the mini entry level dslrs.

People who say the opposite have never tried them.

You might read this the-process-of-street-photography---part-ii---the-goal-decides-the-equipment

Could these following have been easily taken with a big bulky camera?
I took these without any reaction from the subjects.

 

[sifelaver]

Nice captures the_traveler

 

[jaomul]

I have a d7100 and it is a great camera. I also have an Olympus EPL5, which is really very similar to the 0M10 in specs (not looks) but lacks a viewfinder. I find the Olympus fantastic at most things but not fast action. If I was choosing again I would pick the om10 over mine simply for the viewfinder.

So mirrorless or dslr.
I thino dslr is a more complete package for a do it all camera. If I was mostly into street and still life it would be mirrorless all the way. The image quality difference between these olly and Nikon is negligible until you really push the iso. People often say a narrow dof is impossible with micro 4/3rds and while it is not as easy to achieve there are now very fast primes arriving that are pretty good. I would say that the Olympus jpegs straight out of camera are nicer than nikons (before I get jumped on that is just my opinion, not fact).

 

[TheFantasticG]

If street photography is going to be your main squeeze go with the Oly. Being ninja on the street is much easier with smaller unobtrusive gear.

 

[Derrel]

I've heard a lot of good reports on the new Oly "10", as offering great,great value with its standard kit zoom. I agree that for street and candid-in-public snapping that SMALLER lenses are really a benefit. I've shot "small" lenses and "big" lenses and "monstrous lenses",and the bigger the lens, the more noticeable you are, and I think the more suspicious you are to the majority of people. As far as a D-SLR...I think using one in a silver color or a red one, like say the new red little Nikons, might make a person seem a bit more of a non-threatening newb. Silver has become associated with "noob cameras", due to the number of silver P&S designs that were on the market for about a decade, plus the earlier beginner-level Canon and Nikon 35mm SLR bodies, and the earliest digital Rebels in silver.

I would be very tempted to put together a system that is physically small, and can be carried in a small waist pack or jacket pocket. Olympus makes good lenses.

 

[markot]

If you shoot mostly street, scenery and still objects then I would recommend an OM-D. I too shoot mostly still objects, landscapes and some street photography and for this purpose it's perfect for me. I used to shoot with a DSLR years ago, but once I tried out Olympus PEN E-P1 when they came out, I never went back to DSLRs. I currently own Olympus OM-D E-M10 and it's a perfect little camera for that I do. Olympus lenses are really good too and there's many to choose from.

 

[sashbar]

Your message is a bit confusing: do you want a versatile camera, or a camera for street shooting? It is two different choises in my book.
Whatever you choose, do not choose "the best camera", choose the tool that you need for your kind of photography. In my experience a DSLR is not the best option for street photography, especially a big and heavy "advanced" DSLR. If you want to work with a 35 mm lense, then I would definitely consider Fuji X100s. It is not versatile and not beginnerish, but a great tool for street shooting.