Please read the following filtered through the I do not shoot (edit -insert movies) movies, sports or birds in flight filter:
I have a Canon 5DIV w/two "L" lenses
I also have a Canon RP w/RF 24-105 L F4 lens.
I have large hands, but I do not use the grip extension that was provided with the RP body. What a waste.
While the 5DIV is a wonderful camera, on any given day I will pick up the RP/RF lens when heading out the door.
Though I can't provide any proof, I suspect that I get just as many keepers with one as with the other.
Remember, I'm not trying to convince you of anything.
I do suspect that you will convince yourself once you have lived with the RP/RF lens (or Nikon, Sony) for a week.
Once Canon comes out with their "Pro Model" mirrorless body I will fully migrate to their mirrorless "system", and sell the 7D, 6D & 5DIV bodies, and lenses.
Smile,
JimmyT Sends

Once the image is transformed from the sensor to a digital file, there is no appreciable difference. Some sensors have larger pixel resolutions. Some cameras have newer transformation computers (aka processors) to transform the data creating the resulting file. But, at this state of Dec 2019, the end-results are the same, particularly when using the older DSLR lenses adapted to a mirrorless body.

Where the differences do exist today are:

1) Depending on brand, significantly sharper lenses for the mirroress mount vs the older DSLR-centric lenses.

2) The shooting process is improved by the capabilities of an Electronic View Finder (EVF) vs the limited data available in the DSLR's optical view finder.

3) Depending on brand, much higher frame per second capabilities.

4) Depending on brand, much more capable autofocus performance.

5) Depending on brand, battery longevity where the EVF demands more power and you'll get less frames per charge out of a mirrorless camera than DSLR.

6) Depending on the brand and model, ergonomics and build-quality (water-resistance & ruggedness) that are more appropriate for daily, year over year, heavy-duty, professional use.

Due to the differences in the maturity of various products / vendors, you'd have to analyze each of the potential issues and confirm whether the benefit (or limitation) is applicable to the specific camera model being considered.

One thing beyond dispute: the grass is always greener when captured with a mirrorless camera.

Interested in opinions concerning the functionality between DSLR's and Mirror-less cameras. I would like to purchase a mirror-less camera but I am not sold on why. Many blogs tout the future of photography but I have not seen any compelling reasons as to why I would be better off with the future as apposed to what I have at the moment (D700x2 and D500). I mentioned in reply to someone in another post that I don't think the mirror-less cameras were "there" yet. I find that I really don't understand what I even meant by that.

I remember when buttons and dials were all the rage on stereo equipment. Then, that aesthetic was out and touch sensitive electronic stereo systems were "in." Now buttons, dials and switches are back...etc... Is is all aesthetics.

The latest and greatest in mirror-less technology does the same thing DSLR's do...just a slightly different way.

Thoughts, comments, concerns, burns and trolls welcome.

For Canon, it's the lenses, not the camera. Although, if you can't mount a new f/1.2L RF lens to a DSLR, I guess that makes it the camera too ... If you're familiar with any of Canon's lenses, scroll any of Rockwell's sample images, or The Digital Picture (or any review site), and note particularly the wide-open performance. There is no 'step down for better performance' need. These lenses are as good wide-open as any comparable EF mount at any aperture, and their $$$$ prices all reflect that optical excellence. Aperture will become solely an artistic decision, not a performance decision, in future photography.

Interested in opinions concerning the functionality between DSLR's and Mirror-less cameras. I would like to purchase a mirror-less camera but I am not sold on why. Many blogs tout the future of photography but I have not seen any compelling reasons as to why I would be better off with the future as apposed to what I have at the moment (D700x2 and D500). I mentioned in reply to someone in another post that I don't think the mirror-less cameras were "there" yet. I find that I really don't understand what I even meant by that.

I remember when buttons and dials were all the rage on stereo equipment. Then, that aesthetic was out and touch sensitive electronic stereo systems were "in." Now buttons, dials and switches are back...etc... Is is all aesthetics.

The latest and greatest in mirror-less technology does the same thing DSLR's do...just a slightly different way.

Thoughts, comments, concerns, burns and trolls welcome.

Interested in opinions concerning the functionality between DSLR's and Mirror-less cameras. I would like to purchase a mirror-less camera but I am not sold on why. Many blogs tout the future of photography but I have not seen any compelling reasons as to why I would be better off with the future as apposed to what I have at the moment (D700x2 and D500). I mentioned in reply to someone in another post that I don't think the mirror-less cameras were "there" yet. I find that I really don't understand what I even meant by that.

I remember when buttons and dials were all the rage on stereo equipment. Then, that aesthetic was out and touch sensitive electronic stereo systems were "in." Now buttons, dials and switches are back...etc... Is is all aesthetics.

The latest and greatest in mirror-less technology does the same thing DSLR's do...just a slightly different way.

Thoughts, comments, concerns, burns and trolls welcome.

Once the image is transformed from the sensor to a digital file, there is no appreciable difference. Some sensors have larger pixel resolutions. Some cameras have newer transformation computers (aka processors) to transform the data creating the resulting file. But, at this state of Dec 2019, the end-results are the same, particularly when using the older DSLR lenses adapted to a mirrorless body.

Where the differences do exist today are:

1) Depending on brand, significantly sharper lenses for the mirroress mount vs the older DSLR-centric lenses.

2) The shooting process is improved by the capabilities of an Electronic View Finder (EVF) vs the limited data available in the DSLR's optical view finder.

3) Depending on brand, much higher frame per second capabilities.

4) Depending on brand, much more capable autofocus performance.

5) Depending on brand, battery longevity where the EVF demands more power and you'll get less frames per charge out of a mirrorless camera than DSLR.

6) Depending on the brand and model, ergonomics and build-quality (water-resistance & ruggedness) that are more appropriate for daily, year over year, heavy-duty, professional use.

Due to the differences in the maturity of various products / vendors, you'd have to analyze each of the potential issues and confirm whether the benefit (or limitation) is applicable to the specific camera model being considered.

One thing beyond dispute: the grass is always greener when captured with a mirrorless camera.