To those who feel the optical TTL VF is superior to EVF:
IMHO, EVF's have come a long way. Significantly better now than the first gen Sony A7 release that won so many over to ML. Actually so good in the Z cameras, I no longer even notice it's not direct optical TTL. Obviously I understand their technical differences, but honestly don't see much benefit any more to the mirror<>TTL finder as compared to *current state of the art* EVF's -- and let's face it, they will only get better... To my mind, I there are several technical and usability benefits of EVF and at the sensor AF that are not available on a mirror<>TTL based camera. Moreover, I feel a photog that has set their DSLR to mirror up and framing via the rear LCD has just limited themselves to half a ML camera. What am I missing? Finally, if we talk freedom of lens design advantages, then ML leaves DSLR in the dust, and especially so for Nikon's old F compared to new Z design...
But of course, Jack. The best mirrorless cameras are already better than the corresponding DSLR cameras, objectively speaking. Just like a Casio is better than a Rolex and a Lexus better than a Ferrari.
A friend of mine who photograph starry skies showed me a camera he considered buying because it was better than his Canon R with state-of-the-art lenses (Canon 28-70mm f/2 and Sigma 14mm f/1.8) for what he's doing:
So I asked him "What will you do while the camera is taking photos? Can you send a driver with the camera to your selected location so that you can stay at home enjoying a glass of wine instead of getting lost in the wilderness?". He changed his mind.
Within many areas (medicine, transportation etc.) I enjoy the huge progress technology has made. Even with cameras the first 10 years of digital, progress was important. But around the time of the D810 for DSLR and the GH5 for mirrorless, I started to get a feeling that enough is enough. I want cameras that encourage me to develop my skills, not cameras that compensate for my lack of skills.
I'm a minority of course. Most people will buy what makes their job easier. However, it's interesting that one of the sports that are really increasing in popularity, golf, is a sport where one has very little help from technology. If you're bad at it, it doesn't help you much to buy the latest, greatest club. Missing the shot with that club is just as easy and just as frustrating as missing it with with your old, beaten up beginner clubs.
Camera development will undoubtedly continue, and soon we will be able to take that much sought after photo of a black cat in a coal mine. But the fact that I can doesn't mean that I have to. Just as I like the mechanics of a traditional watch, I like the mechanics of a traditional camera. And when it comes to the quality of my images, it doesn't matter one bit if it says click-clack or not. But I do prefer looking through a piece of glass rather than at a piece of electronic circuitry. It's a personal preference of course. Hopefully there are others that think the same. And if there aren't, I should consider stocking up on D810 bodies...