I find them much more difficult to use than old-school dissent cautions. I never had any real issue using the stepped approach to walk someone to a dissent caution if they needed it - this probably only got to the point where I needed to take action every 3-5 games, but the threat of doing it was simple and well-understood. And sometimes a player will just commit a straightforward act of dissent - again, a card for that was usually relatively accepted.
Sin bin feels harsher, so I always feel like I need to give that little bit of extra rope before taking action. Which I know is wrong, but it's not the first time in football we've seen punishments made harsher and immediately enforced less. As a result, I can only think of one time when I've given a sin bin for persistent dissent, it only ever feels correct when it's been for one loud and visible act.
For whatever reason, no one ever seems to expect a sin bin - so it surprises the player in question, and often leads to further dissent or negotiation. Multiple times I've had players ask why I'm sin binning rather than just carding, or tried to persuade me to treat it as a different offence! And I vividly recall being confronted with "you f***ing **** gonna send me to the sin bin?" the first time I ever tried to use it, meaning a sending off as a direct response to the concept of a sin bin.
In my experience, the immediate response to a sin bin is generally 10 more-irritated teammates, at least some of which will be directed at you, whereas no one generally cared about a teammate getting booked for dissent, they would just let you get on with it. It's also, as others have pointed out, an absolute pain to run. 10 minutes of "when can he come back on ref?" is the best-case scenario - if you're unlucky, that player will reoffend and then you have potential for a huge mistake on your hands if you happen to show the wrong card at the wrong time.