Thinking of upgrading: Full frame DSLR or Mirrorless (relegating my old Nikon D3500 as a backup)???

Sorry in advance if I come across as a complete "newbie", which I am not, but let's just say I am a bit "Old School" in my ways.

Yes, yes, I was a film shooter for years and years, refusing to accept the fact that DSLR's were the ways of the future. Slowly I put away the old Canon's and Nikon's... SLR film cameras... and started out with a basic Nikon D3500.

I know, believe me, the Nikon D3500 is a good DSLR, but everything from every manufacturer outperforms it, and basically, blows its doors off with enhanced features, etc..

I learned on the D3500. I read everything I could. I messed with it, over and over, learning all of its features, functions, and abilities. Like I said, it's a great camera for an "entry level" DX crop factor style DSLR. Nothing wrong with it at all. It does what it's supposed to do, perfectly fine!

Getting to the point, I now find myself at a crossroads. Do I stay with DSLR's and look the new full frame Nikon's or switch playing fields and look at the latest Canon full frame DSLR's? Or, take the plunge and look into the new Mirrorless cameras?

If you were in the market for a new camera, would you stick with DSLR's or go Mirrorless? I'm curious as to what the current trend is....

In the Canon system, I think it's safe to say that many people are taking the ML plunge with the bodies and using their existing EF lenses, and then gradually (or not so gradually) migrating their lenses to RF. That is basically my trajectory. 7D2, 7D2+R7, R7, R7+ R3, and at this point I still have all EF lenses but I suspect I won't be buying many more. My next lens will probably be the RF 24-70, although I might still buy an EF UWA just because RF doesn't matter that much in that case.

If you are in the Nikon DSLR system and looking for an upgrade, I don't see moving to FF DSLRs, especially with a brand change, as an attractive move. The real upgrade IMO is moving to mirrorless. Of course, it also depends on what you shoot and looking at your gallery you aren't shooting action (which is where ML or at least the most advanced DSLR bodies really shines). If improved IQ is what you're mainly after, maybe a jump to FF would help but you are investing in a new-to-you system that is on its way out.

Hey, I'm right over here in Charlottesville and will be in Goochland on Friday afternoon/evening. If you want to meet up and check out the R7 and R3, ping me. The functionality that ML brings is very solid for the action shooting I do.

Thank you!!!

Charlottesville?!? Very cool! My daughter & son-in-law (and toddler granddaughter) just bought a house in the Lake Monticello area, after transferring jobs within the public school teaching systems.

I guess I like scenery. I like quiet natural environments, where it's just me and my camera and Mother Nature. Something captures my eye, I have to study the lighting, direction, and scene that I want to capture. No need for 1/650,000 shutter speed, ha ha ha...

It could be that you are an ideal candidate for getting bargains on used FF DSLR equipment! If your lenses are all DX then I suppose it would be a clean start with any brand.

For folks who have owned a dSLR, who is thinking about making the upgrade to mirrorless, i tell this bit of advice...

WHAT does the mirrorless do, which the dSLR cannot do, in which the dSLR is limiting you as a photographer? If you can articulate the answer to that question, you are indeed needing a mirrorless, otherwise you merely WANT to upgrade to mirrorless with no real reason why you should spend more money for mirrorless...not everyone NEEDS to have the features of the mirrorless!

I do not need 20-30fps shooting, I do not need to have AF on animal eyes or even human eyes...I do not shoot game nor do I regularly cover sports where I need the assist of AF finding the eyes of the subject for me. So, given the more expensive cost of new mirrorless lenses and the relative shortage of used mirrorless lenses, the added expense of mirrorless simply does not YET make sense FOR ME...for you it might be a different set of needs which drives you toward mirrorless; but maybe not.

Since you have not yet ventured into the dSLR world, to encounter limitations for YOUR shooting, that makes the decision a more difficult one...you do not yet know where the dSLR limits YOUR shooting.

If your ok with the used route, there are lots of ff Nikon camera out there at very reasonable prices. Just peaking at Keh, you can pick up a D810 for between $650 and $850. It's still an awesome body even though it's a few years old.

I think this thread mixes together a few different issues.

First, it matters in this case whether you want to buy used or new. There are some good deals on used DSLRs and lenses for them.

The second issue is what you are shooting and what will benefit you. IMHO, given what you shoot, the choice of sensor may be as important or more important than DSLR/mirrorless. The advantages of full frame are all about image quality, at the cost of less reach. So FF is more of a plus for landscape shooters and can be a disadvantage for wildlife and macro shooters.

A lot of the bells and whistles on good mirrorless cameras don't help landscape photographers. For example, I traded my Canon 5D Mark IV, a truly wonderful DSLR, for a Canon R6 Mark II mirrorless. The AF of the R6 II blows the socks off the AF of the 5D IV. That helps me a lot with candids of kids, which I do a lot, but is pretty much worthless for landscapes.

On the other hand, some features would help with landscapes too. For example, I can set the R6 II to show an RGB histogram in the viewfinder, which can be very helpful. Ditto, showing aperture, shutter speed, ISO, and exposure level.

However, if you are buying new, and if you are buying FF, I don't think it matters that mirrorless will give you features you don't need. The fact is that the market is becoming overwhelmingly focused on mirrorless. Canon, for example, is gradually phasing out some of its EF (DSLR full frame) lenses, including one that I use. So buying a DSLR is gambling on a rapidly shrinking part of the market. And electric viewfinders have become so good that I don't see much advantage to a DSLR.