Is DSLR considered good, fair, or subpar?

I'm looking for a new camera, and am considering an upper tier Nikon like the d7100

i'm an amateur although quite enthusiastic photographer and have the heard the phrase DSLR mentioned a lot

i know what it means but not if it means a top notch camera, lousy, or somewhere in the middle

if you could enlighten me i would be grateful.

Dslrs are the best and top cameras on the market with mirrorless (smaller sensor and more compact) cameras right beneath them. The d7100 was just released and is one of, if not the best crop sensored cameras out right now. Now pro dslrs are full frame cameras that have larger sensors, but are thousands of dollars. A d7100 would be perfect if you're an enthusiast photographer!

The Digital Single Lens Reflex (look it up) uses an optical viewfinder of a very specific type. Find out for yourself what one would do for you, and if you need one. They're developed from the 35mm SLRs used by professional and advanced amateur photographers for decades due to their versatility.

EVIL/MILC types offer interchangeable lenses (like most DSLRs) without the optical viewfinder - this has the advantage of making them smaller and lighter, but it's like taking that big, heavy engine out of your car.

DSLRs = best
Mirrorless = better
Compact Cameras = good
Smart Phone Cameras = subpar

I did not add medium format cameras, such as Hasselblads, which would be better than best, but at $30, 000~$50, 000, you probably don't care.

In the DSLR range, the D7100 is in the top 25% of the best DSLRs. The only ones that are better are the full frame pro DSLRs in the $6, 000 range.

And as you spend more money, you get diminishing returns. That means, once you get to the $1, 200 level of the D7100, spending $2, 400 will not get you double the camera, but perhaps only a 10% improvement.

Most pros use a D-SLR. The D7100 is not a top tier camera. It's more in the middle. Top would be a Nikon D4, or D3s/x. That's where you can spend $6, 000 just on the body.