Background
-----------

For quite a long time, I was a Nikon shooter and had a number of pro bodies. I quit doing pro work and decided to switch to Canon purchasing the XSI and was really impressed with the IQ (which I felt was better than Nikon). I got tired of SLRs and purchased my first mirror-less camera the Pen. I admit I have a thing for retro bodies and the format interested me. The Pen was really a fun camera to use. It was slow, but otherwise I found myself being more creative and taking the camera more places (it's less awkward to pull out the Pen compared to an SLR). Olympus JPEGs are impressive and their color palette is definitely noteworthy as well. When my wife and I had our twins 5 months ago I sold the Pen and return to an SLR (XSI again) feeling that I *needed* an SLR having two girls.

The PEN vs. XSI (My subjective feelings)

IQ:
----
The XSI definitely produces a cleaner file with better per pixel sharpness and dynamic range. Canon color is also very good to excellent. White balance is good.

Olympus produces a super JPEG file. The light AA filter affords quite a crispy image. Olympus color is superb. White balance is excellent. Dyanamic range is ok, metering does make up for this at times.

High ISO is subjective. While the Canon produces a better file from a purist perspective, Olympus does a better job with maintaining color rendition and contrast which I prefer.

The pixel peeper will prefer the Canon, the printer will perfer the Olympus

Performance
--------------
The XSI is no doubt a better machine from battery life, operation, menus and speed.

Focusing
----------
This is one area which may come as a surprise: Yes the Canon is faster, but the Olympus is much more accurate. The Olympus is slow to focus, but focus is spot-on accurate (I supposed that's because mirror-less cameras are not subject to back/front focusing). I missed more moments with the Pen, but have more OOF shots with the Canon...

Lenses
--------
One would think Canon kills Olympus in this regard, but subjectively so I am on the fence. Canon does have quite the collection of glass, but IMHO, the Panasonic 20 1.7 is one of the best lenses I have ever owned. I have never owned a prime as sharp wide-open as the Panasonic and the bokeh (at least close-up) as lovely. This is a poor man's Leica. Now Olympus has another winner in the 45 1.8. These lenses are tiny but perform like 'L' glass (at least in terms of IQ)

Fun Factor
-------------
No doubt the Olympus is more fun to use. Yes some of this is purely psychological, but the art-filters, OOC JPEGs which never require PP and the sheer fact it doesn't draw attention make it more enjoyable to use.

So why I am debating all of this ? Because logic tells me the XSI is a near-perfect camera and should suffice all my needs, yet the artist in me cry's out for the pen.


I have been debating the move for a while, I might just pick up the pen and use both for a while and decide which to sell/keep. Anyone else have mixed feelings at times and find themselves town between a DSLR and mirrorless ?

I think you have answered your question yourself !
And there is now a superb 45mm 1.8 portrait lens too !

I decided to order the EPL2 + 20 1.7 (Pretty expensive new).  I had held the Black EPL2 a few months back and thought it was one of the most attractive cameras I have ever seen (plus love the grip).  I originally had the EP1 and EPL1 so I am familiar with the series.  I am skipping the newer models.

Quote from: asterinex on December 20, 2011, 10:19:22 AM

I think you have answered your question yourself !
And there is now a superb 45mm 1.8 portrait lens too !

I decided to order the EPL2 + 20 1.7 (Pretty expensive new).  I had held the Black EPL2 a few months back and thought it was one of the most attractive cameras I have ever seen (plus love the grip).  I originally had the EP1 and EPL1 so I am familiar with the series.  I am skipping the newer models.

Congrats ! Just in time to join the 2011 contest!:)

I don't think I can ever go back to Canon after using the PEN. Canon is just so...easy.

Your right.  This is the third time I have switched from a PEN back to an SLR and every time I regret it.  I started with the EP-1 (after selling my D200) and took some of the best indoor pictures ever (thanks to IBS and the great high ISO output).  I sold the EP-1 and returned to a Nikon D3000 SLR.  I sold the D3000 after finding I never used it (didn't inspire like the Pen) and bought an E-PL1 + 20 1.7.  Took some of the best pictures ever with the Pen (once again).  I then sold the E-PL1 after my wife became pregnant with our twin girls (fearing I would need an SLR with kids) and bought a Rebel XSI.  Now I am returning for the third time with an E-PL2.  I am completely retarted.

I have been shooting with my e-p1 for over a year now.  Some of my favorite images were shot with that little gem.  Unfortunately, the AF has made taking pictures of my fast-moving son nearly impossible.  I've missed so many shots that I have often wanted to toss my Pen out the nearest window.  With the release of the E-p3, I am considering staying with m4/3rds for a little while longer.

Enter the conundrum...  I was asked to shoot a wedding this summer, giving me the needed funds to upgrade my camera and add a lens.  So now I find myself in the same situation... do I go with a DSLR that will give me fast AF, good dynamic range, and less noise in low light?  Or do I rent a DSLR and pick up the E-p3 in hopes that I can figure out how to avoid blowing out highlights and focus on my son?  I have gone back and forth so many times... I even tried out a Nikon d90, with very positive results (except a back-focusing issue, which forced me to return the camera).  And so I continue to shoot with my e-p1...

Javarob75

Personally, you may consider the GH2, you will find having a EVF built in the camera, a much more natural way to shoot a Wedding.
I wouldn't be so concerned about DR... it is more a "Lab" number than an image factor... I don't think ANY customer (or photographer) can tell the difference between a 10 step DR over an 11 step DR... The difference is VERY small, (1/10 of a step) and can be manipulated in Post as far as the final contrast and levels/curves to tweak local areas of concern. You can't add DR, but, you can tweak local areas.

as far as lenses, the 12-35mm f/2.8  Panny should be out by then. and the 45-175 also... may be a good combo
Granted, the 45-175 is fast, but the IQ is higher than the 45-150's... but, the GH2 has VG ISO 1600 and 2000 IQ.

Regarding DR... I'm sick of blowing out highlights using my E-P1!  My son has very blond hair, and on a bright sunny day, the top of his head always seems to get blown out (even with the Exposure comp. set to -1.0).  If someone has a solution, I'm open to any suggestions! 
Regarding the EVF, I would probably look at the VF 2 if I bought an E-p3.  I like the GH2, but I love the IQ of the PENs...
That being said, I would probably rent a DSLR for the wedding, regardless of which m4/3rds camera I chose (if I decided to stick with m4/3rds).  The m4/3rds camera would become my backup body...

The E-P1 loves to blow out highlights in every way possible. Oh how that camera can test me sometimes...

The E-P1 loves to blow out highlights in every way possible. Oh how that camera can test me sometimes...

Is there an improvement with the e-p3?  Or the gh2?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Another thing:
You can adjust the Exposure compensation to [-.3 or -.6], and that should give you highlight detail you can bring up with in post later to the brightness you want.
Most Digital cameras already try to do this anyway.. It is no crime to keep your EC at a setting off "0".. whatever you need to do to get a good exposure.
And the variance from camera to camera may have a play in it too.

There's a difference in dynamic range from the E-P1 to the E-P3.