>>4059854The problem is, people have different approaches and experiences, then come to compare and conclude unobjectively.
The 6D was shat on in reviews, stood behind vamped up AF from Nikon, but also AF in the 7D and 5D3. The 6D felt unenjoyable and outdated even at release. Still or for this reason, it was a cheap buy and still a highy suitable camera when used traditionally, so in focus and recompose. Center single point AF still and more than ever robustly provided steady, fast and accurate results, where 3D tracking, AF expansion, zone or auto was inconsistent, had a hard time with lens design, vignette and field curvature, RSA, and the like off center.
Focus and recompose under the center single AF point is exactly the usecase where I'm still happy to resort back to DSLR and feel underwhelmed with mirrorless. The OVF shows the scene in depth even with a fast lens. The center single point nails even low contrast, small area measuring points of very unrestricted direction, even in dim light, and it's backed up easily to prevent hunting at night with an unflashy AF assist light. I feel like AF point selection is not a good option on either system, just viable with backup and restore of several predefined AF fields only. I feel like Auto or large area AF is only great on mirrorless, and primarily on set applications like Eye and Face AF, other objects where I have no experience with.
What I wanted to say, DSLR are a compromise, but so are mirrorless and any type of camera.
Praising one kind up to the sky is not objective but narrow minded.
Personally, I don't like the situation as a balancing act between severql systems, I lack a clear upgrade path and adapt and bring several cameras of necessity, rather do not upgrade than be left with only the upgrade.
