>>4211353The difference is there, but probably doesn't actually matter for most shooting. Lenses matter much more, but to get the most out of many great lenses, full frame is where it's at. For the same fov and dof, you end up with similar ISO. I find myself often dof limited beyond f2 on ff, so aps-c is fine for me in terms of dof, however shooting wide open at f1.4 on aps-c is nearly always gonna be optically worse than a goof ff lens stopped down to ff.
APS-C being smaller / cheaper used to make sense a decade ago, but not so much anymore. Having an aps-c camera shouldn't hold you back, but I see little reason to go for one over FF unless you love the fuji x platform. If you have aps-c already, that shouldn't hold you back too much, but I'd see no reason not to just jump right to ff if possible. There are also reasons to go for a ff camera, even ignoring the sensor difference itself, like often larger viewfinder, more features, etc.
I have a few "practical" comparison shots across formats like picrel. Not exactly the same, but decent for showing what the actual difference in DR might look like. For a pro example, this shoot for GRAZIA
https://thebkmag.com/2019/07/06/the-80s-back-anna-valahu-grazia-benjamin-kanarek/ was a mix of X-T3 and GFX.
