I used to do analog lomography.

I want to switch to digital. I can already take pictures with a crappy digital machine(e.g. my smartphone) and edit them. I know it is not the same as lomography, but it is the result that counts for me.

I am looking to buy a good camera (limited budget, say 500€). Main concern is that I am able to print out pictures in big, so with high resolution (which my smartphone does not allow).

Another concern is color. I want to achieve very nice colors.

I am doubting between dslr and milc.

In the dslr category, I would opt for nikon d5100, possibly with f1/1.8, 35mm lens. In the milc category, i don't yet have a favorite (Olympus PEN E-PL2?).

Everybody seems to say that dslr is better then milc, but is this still the case? I don't want to take super realistic pictures, but sharp ones with high color contrast. I realise that the discussion milc versus dslr is an extensive one and I don't want to get into that.

I am tending towards the d5100, but I was just wondering, for artistic pictures, with lomo like effects, couldn't it be that milc cameras offer better color values and overal composition? And the dslr is not worth carrying the extra weight?

I used to do analog lomography.

I want to switch to digital. I can already take pictures with a crappy digital machine  (my smartphone) and edit them. I know it is not the same as lomography, but it is the result that counts for me.

I am looking to buy a good camera (limited budget, say 500€). My main concern is that I am able to print out pictures big, so high resolution is required (which my smartphone does not provide).

Another concern is color. I want to achieve very nice colors.

I am weighing my options between a digital SLR and a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera.

In the DSLR category, I would opt for nikon d5100, possibly with the f1/1.8, 35mm lens. In the MILC category, I don't yet have a favorite (but am considering the Olympus PEN E-PL2).

Everybody seems to say that DSLR is better then MILC, but is this still the case? I don't want to take super-realistic pictures, but I do want sharp ones with high color contrast. I realise that the discussion MILC versus DSLR is an extensive one and I don't want to get into that in general.

I am tending towards the D5100, but I was just wondering, for artistic pictures, with lomo-like effects, couldn't it be that MILC cameras offer better color values and overal composition? And the DSLR is not worth carrying the extra weight?

I used to do analog lomography.

I want to switch to digital. I can already take pictures with a crappy digital machine(e.g. my smartphone) and edit them. I know it is not the same as lomography, but it is the result that counts for me.

I am looking to buy a good camera (limited budget, say 500€). Main concern is that I am able to print out pictures in big, so with high resolution (which my smartphone does not allow).

Another concern is color. I want to achieve very nice colors.

I am doubting between dslr and milc.

In the dslr category, I would opt for nikon d5100, possibly with f1/1.2, 35mm lens. In the milc category, i don't yet have a favorite (Olympus PEN E-PL2?).

Everybody seems to say that dslr is better then milc, but is this still the case? I don't want to take super realistic pictures, but sharp ones with high color contrast. I realise that the discussion milc versus dslr is an extensive one and I don't want to get into that.

I am tending towards the d5100, but I was just wondering, for artistic pictures, with lomo like effects, couldn't it be that milc cameras offer better color values and overal composition? And the dslr is not worth carrying the extra weight?

I used to do analog lomography.

I want to switch to digital. I can already take pictures with a crappy digital machine(e.g. my smartphone) and edit them. I know it is not the same as lomography, but it is the result that counts for me.

I am looking to buy a good camera (limited budget, say 500€). Main concern is that I am able to print out pictures in big, so with high resolution (which my smartphone does not allow).

Another concern is color. I want to achieve very nice colors.

I am doubting between dslr and milc.

In the dslr category, I would opt for nikon d5100, possibly with f1/1.8, 35mm lens. In the milc category, i don't yet have a favorite (Olympus PEN E-PL2?).

Everybody seems to say that dslr is better then milc, but is this still the case? I don't want to take super realistic pictures, but sharp ones with high color contrast. I realise that the discussion milc versus dslr is an extensive one and I don't want to get into that.

I am tending towards the d5100, but I was just wondering, for artistic pictures, with lomo like effects, couldn't it be that milc cameras offer better color values and overal composition? And the dslr is not worth carrying the extra weight?

I used to do analog lomography.

I want to switch to digital. I can already take pictures with a crappy digital machine(e.g. my smartphone) and edit them. I know it is not the same as lomography, but it is the result that counts for me.

I am looking to buy a good camera (limited budget, say 500€). Main concern is that I am able to print out pictures in big, so with high resolution (which my smartphone does not allow).

Another concern is color. I want to achieve very nice colors.

I am doubting between dslr and milc.

In the dslr category, I would opt for nikon d5100, possibly with f1/1.2, 35mm lens. In the milc category, i don't yet have a favorite (Olympus PEN E-PL2?).

Everybody seems to say that dslr is better then milc, but is this still the case? I don't want to take super realistic pictures, but sharp ones with high color contrast. I realise that the discussion milc versus dslr is an extensive one and I don't want to get into that.

I am tending towards the d5100, but I was just wondering, for artistic pictures, with lomo like effects, couldn't it be that milc cameras offer better color values and overal composition? And the dslr is not worth carrying the extra weight?

Thanks for any expert insight.

I used to do analog lomography.

I want to switch to digital. I can already take pictures with a crappy digital machine(e.g. my smartphone) and edit them. I know it is not the same as lomography, but it is the result that counts for me.

I am looking to buy a good camera (limited budget, say 500€). Main concern is that I am able to print out pictures in big, so with high resolution (which my smartphone does not allow).

Another concern is color. I want to achieve very nice colors.

I am doubting between dslr and milc.

In the dslr category, I would opt for nikon d5100, possibly with f1/1.2, 35mm lens. In the milc category, i don't yet have a favorite (Olympus PEN E-PL2?).

Everybody seems to say that dslr is better then milc, but is this still the case? I don't want to take super realistic pictures, but sharp ones with high color contrast. I realise that the discussion milc versus dslr is an extensive one and I don't want to get into that.

I am tending towards the d5100, but I was just wondering, for artistic pictures, with lomo like effects, couldn't it be that milc cameras offer better color values and overal composition? And the dslr is not worth carrying the extra weight?