Seeking APS-C opinions re having two smalls or one DSLR

[Codger]

I keep reading about the remarkable IQ from some of the small single-focal length cameras, and have wondered if it would be better to get a Sigma DP1m (or Ricoh GR) along with a DP2m  (with an est combined cost of $ 1,140) . . . OR . . . a Nikon D7100 and a Sigma 18-35 f1.8 at about $ 2,000?

These set-ups would be roughly equivalent for range.  The downside with the compacts would include not having any kind of viewfinder (back LCD, only) and no possibility of other focal lengths (tele) in the future.  The downside for the DSLR would be the higher initial cost (and weight, size), but would allow for the addition of other focal lengths in the future.

In terms of cost-effectiveness for serious picture making (IQ and exposure flexibility -- DR, ISO, noise) do you feel one has an edge, long-term, over the other?  Thanks.

[Martin Ranger]

Codger,
this depends very much on what kind of photos you take. Do you need a fast camera (Nikon), additional focal lengths (Nikon), viewfinder (Nikon), an external flash system (Nikon), high ISO capabilities (Nikon)? If you need any of these, I would argue you will not be happy with a Sigma or Ricoh.

If not, I would suggest renting both for a few days to see how you get along with either, and compare the output of the cameras. Personally, I would be willing to trade of some image quality for usability (assuming there are no external constraints).

Also, Sigma just significantly updated the DP line. You might want to wait for the new cameras to come out (even if only to get a used DP m).

Martin