I'm not entirely sure what you're asking here, for photography a gimbal isn't that useful as it's mainly a help for video plus a DSLR is significantly better for photography than the Mavic 2 Pro.
I have seen some people using a mount for their Mavic Pro so they can handhold it for stabilised video but I prefer something like the DJI Osmo Mobile 2 and use my phone instead as it's not too expensive, it's more convenient and no risk to my drone.
of the options given, clearly dslr. of course the tool is only part of the equation. i have seen some pretty amazing shots from a drone (even if not technically high quality compared to many dslr models.) ive also seen people who would get better shots using a potato than their dslr.
fwiw, only a month or so after getting my mavic 2 pro, i felt an urge to upgrade my canon 80d with an eos r. camera and drone shall coexist (along with the gopro) as they all have their uses. hell, my galaxy s10+ gets more shutter clicks than all my other toys combined. =)
Just different tools for doing a job, some tools work better then other's in some situations. Not going to throw my dslr up in the air with a self timer set like I would my drone, nor dunk it in a lake or river, like my go pro. Just matters what I am
photographing or videotaping that day, and how much of the gear I want to carry around.
DSLR is not really an option, how are you going to control it 1/2 mile out? Plus they are still large and somewhat expensive even mirrorless.
What is needed IMO is a drone more oriented to photography, not video. DJI has that in the Inspire 2, but at around 8K (that is will extra batteries and full range of lenses and their 24mp AP-C sensor). The Inspire is huge, loud and always draws a crowd. It's something I can just throw into a pack and hike 10 miles to get to where I want to shoot.
The M2 Pro has a OK setup but it's really needing some better design points:
1. Portrait orientation for gimbal like the MPP (huge for manual panos)
2. Less with less retrofocus distortion. (To see this just pan across a scene and watch the object elongate and flatten as they approach the edge of the frame, buildings, mountains etc.) makes a pano hard to construct (see number 1)
3. A sensor with better low DR recovery. The M2 Pro even at 100 ISO has about a 1/2 stop maybe 3/4 stop of shadow recovery. It does better with highlights, so exposing to the right helps. But you still need a lot of images to handle a high key scene (sunrise)
4. More bracketing exposure steps, at least 1 stop per bracket instead of .7. This is so simple to change in firmware DJI just refusing to do it, shows their lack of understanding of needs of a photographer.
5. Interchangeable lenses, (at a reasonable cost and weight). P5 platform rumor was just that, and it if was based on that drone not what I want as you see props way to often and in all true panos where you are looking up.
6. Better communication with Adobe for color profiles as the current ones are limited for the M2 Pro (unless the last LR/ACR update changed this) currently you only have the Adobe defaults and the Modern series none of which are that good.
7. Better solution for manual focus. There is no 100% view for checking your focus as with any DSLR, and this is critical for the best focus. Currently if you zoom anywhere close to 100% view is blurred and checking a image on iPad or SC again you can get up to 100% without blur
There are more, but my point is there is a lot more needed than DSLR vs Gimbal. The former is not really an option unless you want a huge, loud, heavy, drone like M500, I don't and the current gimbal drones just need more development.
It completly depends on what you want to do and how much money you have to spend.
Using a drone (with the camera mounted at a gimbal) offers you a variety of options. But it also confronts you with a variety of limits. Using a DSLR gives you exactly the same problem.
I use a Mavic Air for areal footage, a Canon 750E for pure photography or wildlife video (300 mm lens), two different Sony HD-Cams for normal video and a Denver Action cam for the moments I decide to go for a swim.
In the combination, I can pretty much do whatever I like or is requiered.
The disadvantage; I need pretty much loadingcapacity in the car for all my equipment, and, over the years, I have spent probably more then a small car for my stuff.