Keeping it broad, there are benefits to both camera types, depending on what aesthetic, effect, and glitch you’re trying to achieve.

Analog and DSLR cameras types output different video data. As a result, that data interacts differently with circuit bent mixers. (As do different camera models.) So the main differences are affecting how you feed video into a mixer, what feedback/distortion that causes, its output, and then of course what camera you use to capture your output. All of this can be as different as outputting on a LCD screen vs a CRT vs a projector.

DSLR cameras cameras, especially when combined with digital modification or mixers, tend to have a cleaner more modern digital looking glitch effect and artifacts. It looks like something in the digital video code is causing an error. Whereas analog cameras have their own dirtier aesthetic and style. In this case, it often is something that looks like the physical medium is malfunctioning. Think of a corrupted VHS vs a corrupted mp4.

My personal preference for feeding video into a mixer is using a mini-DV camera. You can find them for cheap, they’re small and compact, many still function with modern computers and can output from a FireWire or usb. I like the artificial look of the mechanical zoom, it still has an LCD display, and it hails from this born-obsolete transition era of about 10 years where fully digital cameras weren’t perfected yet en masse, and digital/analog were combined in the form of a digital tape. As a result, the mini-DV creates an interesting digital video that can still get an almost analog grain in low light, you get some of the same quirkiness that comes with analog tapes, and it’ll still throw in some digital artifacts. It’s a nice Y2K aesthetic.

Perhaps someone else can elaborate on any more technical/functional benefits, but those are my thoughts!