A few months ago, I purchased a new (to me) camera: a Nikon D500 in pristine condition, with ~100k shutter clicks. The rationale? Buying into a similarly capable mirrorless system from pretty much any manufacturer would cost an absurd amount of money.

Consider the Nikon Z50, for instance: 21MP, crop sensor, with sensor performance about on par with the D7500/D500. Here in Canada, the Z50 costs ~$1000 new, about the same price as a new D7500 or ~$200 under a (low shutter count) used D500. This doesn’t seem all that bad until you factor in lens prices (and availability) for the Z system. Now, compare the (current) prices of F mount lenses, and the gap starts to widen. Add in the fact that the Z50 is unstabilized and doesn’t (in my opinion) offer considerable benefits* over a modern high-ish end DSLR (same sensor as the d500/d7500 except with phase detect points) , and carries the usual downsides of a lower-end mirrorless ILC: low res EVF, questionable battery life and mediocre build quality… you can see why a DSLR is more budget-friendly.

A similar pattern appears elsewhere, with any “affordable” mirrorless ILC offering questionable performance in some fashion - the Z5 is limited to 5fps, the Z6 has shadow banding, the a6XXX before the a6700 have horrible ergonomics (no front dial ??!!!), fuji’s autofocus performance is questionable, and the R7/10 have, what, 5 native lenses? (also, Canon’s APS-C sensors have been lacking in dynamic range for several generations)

Enter the D500 - touted as the best crop sensor DSLR ever made, with the autofocus system of the Nikon D5 in a (comparably) lightweight body. A dedicated autofocus CPU and 153 autofocus points, 180k pixel metering sensor, 10fps shooting, and built like an absolute tank.

In pretty much any scenario, the D500 performs either on par or runs circles around the Z50 (and others), with more consistent, fast and poweful autofocus**, a much deeper buffer, amazing battery life, dual card slots (with CFe B!), a bright 100% coverage, 1.0x magnification (APS-C, equivalent to 0.67x FF) viewfinder, significantly better build quality and weathersealing, and above all: access to a vast lens catalog at incredible prices.

Now, you may ask: how much did you pay for your D500? The answer: ~$900 (CAD), tax included. About ~$400-500 less than most listings, partially due to the high shutter count and potentially a bit of luck. Personally, I felt comfortable buying a camera with 100k clicks, as the d500’s shutter module is rated to 200k, and at my picture taking rate, another 100k should take 5+ years at an absolute minimum. As of 06/2024, there are still bodies with low shutter counts available at B&H and KEH, though prices are in the $1200 - $1400 CAD range (tax included).

I am personally a huge fan of 50mm APS-C (85mm FF equivalent), and I was able to pick up a 24-70mm f2.8 G2 for $880 CAD (tax included), which covers a nice 36-105mm on APS-C. For wide angle coverage, a Tokina 12-24mm f4 (eqiv 18-36mm FF) can be found for <$300 with tax.

Now, consider that an R7 or a6700 cost ~$2100 with tax, body only, and that I was able to pick up a d500 body ($900) + a very nice (full frame!) f2.8 stabilized lens ($880) + a nice f4 wide angle ($250), with coverage 18-105mm at reasonable apertures… at less than the price ($2100) of those bodies. With great battery life, too ;)

Do I recommend this for everyone? No, absolutely not. Mirrorless ILCs do have many benefits over DSLRs, especially in terms of usability and intuitiveness for people learning photography. Especially if you are willing to shell out the big $$$ for a high end system, mirrorless ILC have essentially rendered DSLRs obselete with only a few exceptions. Resale values of DSLRs are going to be dropping rapidly in the next few years.

However, I don’t think I will be selling my D500 anytime soon. It’s a powerhouse of a camera, and every day it finds a way to impress me in a different way. I would urge anyone who has a limited budget to consider a new/used DSLR instead of a mirrorless ILC. The D500 is able to provide a powerful platform at a fraction of the price of an mILC system, as long as you can deal with the caveats!

*Some notes on useful mILC features that you may miss:

• With an EVF, mirrorless cameras can offer a preview of the final image, which is a godsend for beginners trying to learn photography
• Focus peaking is a godsend for manual focus lenses, if you shoot MF often, you probably want to try mirrorless (unless you like the challenge, I suppose)
• Video is often a mess on DSLRs eg. the d500 has a 1.5x crop for 4k (still very usable, just wouldn’t recommend as a primary video camera)

**Notes on autofocus:

• With the release of lenses like the 18-50mm F2.8 DC DN for the RF mount, the R7/10 are now much more compelling options. As much as the D500 can try, a state of the art focus system from 2016 cannot match one from 2022 in terms of tracking capability. Especially for situtations where eye detect can be used effectively, the R7/10 will have a major advantage over the D500. However, the D500 puts up a very respectable fight. Again, keep in mind that the R7 costs $2100 with tax…
• The D500, in my opinion, still has a edge, when it comes to fast motion/tracking, over the Nikon Z50/fc/30 as well as the Fuji XT-30II/XS-10/20. The Sony A6XXX series is a bit more tough to say, but I would put the D500 on par with the a6100/400/600 generation in terms of autofocus capabilities. Ergonomically, it tends to be a bit ahead though ;)
• However, keep in mind that focus accuracy is ofter better on mILCs as the focus is done directly from the sensor, instead of through a mirror into a separate focus module
• Importantly, this on sensor PDAF does come with a drawback - in very low light or high dynamic range situations, weird artifacts and shadow banding can occur, as the phase detect pixels/rows capture less light. Camera manufacturers try to mitigate this with complex algorithms, but it can go wrong (à la Z6) or get outwitted in complex light.