Old DSLRs vs Mirrorless image quality

[dominikot]

I’m looking to shoot objects indoors with artificial lighting and I was wondering, given perfect light conditions, still objects and the camera mounted on a tripod, do the latest full frames like the R8 produce visibly better images than say a 5D mark ii/iii or a 6D or even a 5DSR which can be found used for great prices nowadays? Or should I buy an older dslr and invest in lenses? Thank you

[Waddizzle]

Food for thought:  Your camera records images that have been resolved by whichever lens you’re using.  

But, you use the camera to control and focus the lens.  For the most part, MILC bodies are able to focus EF lenses more effectively than DSLR bodies. 

Furthermore, RF lenses are able to outperform their EF ancestors. And the image sensors in the MILCs tend to outperform their DSLR predecessors. 

[kvbarkley]

Visibly better in what way? I think it was The Online Photographer, Mike Johnston, who said that pretty much any camera can take good quality images in good light, with a moderate aperture at moderate distances. It is when you get into the corners: High ISO and maximum aperture's that differences in equipment/processing stand out.

So if you are in total control of the situation, there probably won't be much quality difference between cameras.