Were DSLRs always this much fun to use?

After a 12 year break from big cameras, i have recently acquired a pair of "modern" canon 100D cameras, SL1 in N. America, with one kit lens and one 50mm f1.8 on the way. I just started playing with this camera and its kit lens and i`m actually really impressed. The 100D is already an old model, but it`s much easier to use than my old 400D, and the STM kit lens is actually very decent(fairly sharp, silent), i have no problem using it and it is visibly better than the old 18-55 II or some more recent kit lenses, like the sony 16-50mm(this is opinion, not fact).

Shooting with the camera is much fun. As far as DSLRs go, the 100D is a small and light camera and very similar to a mirorless, but instead of a EVF it has the classic OVF, which i prefer.

I don`t remember ever having this much fun with a non-compact camera before. Of course, when travelling my rx100 pocket cameras have priority because they are easy to carry, but the old-school DSLR shooting experience is superior. It is worth the hassle of carrying one around, and the resulting images are easier to edit too, probably because of that bigger sensor.

Last but not least, considering that i paid less than 250 dollars on two 100D cameras, plus the kit lens and a 50mm f1.8 STM all used but in really good condition, i`m really starting to doubt my previous position regarding dslr price stagnation\see thread.

I mean, it is obvious to me that these cameras still have what it takes, and the prices on the used market are reasonable when compared to some recent mirorless offerings.

When comparing the 100D with my sony rx100 VII i find that the dslr is no slouch despite being old, it`s doesn`t have things like pet eye detect yet the images come out looking great even with the kit lens, noise levels are probably comparable but somehow on the dslr the images come out looking better. I have not tested video yet, i suspect the dslr is no match for the rx100, but again- does it matter? It`s a whole lot of camera for 1/4 of the price i paid for the pocket rocket. And realistically, a dslr will always be a whole lot more rugged than any compact camera, which is good because i can appreciate a dependable tool.

In conclusion, the tiny canon SL1- a very fun camera to use, if nothing else. I have ocassionaly shot mirorless, but i think the user experience favors the dslr. The OVF and the whole shooting experience make it worth to me, and the cheap lens available for this cameras are actually quite decent now, as opposed to a decade ago- of course, iso 6400 helps too, my 400D topped out at iso 1600. This camera is a keeper.

Thanks for reading and for your efforts, here are some early sooc images taken with the 100D and the 18-55 3.5-5.6 IS STM kit lens. I think they are more than decent, what do you think?

Heavily cropped- still looking good !

Beautiful pics.

$250 - that's a really good deal. A single 100d here costs around £150, which is at least as many dollars $$$.