>>2661671> Again with the full frame. It is only introducing more costs without the actual benefits.Did you perhaps miss the part where macro (insects) and portraits and more was mentioned apart from birds?
I did pick a more average combination not strongly focused on birding (doesn't even include a 300mm+ lens, eh).
Nothing suggests that the lighting conditions encountered will always be good, either.
> You can crop in but you will already lose resolution to reach the framing of an APS-C combo and depending on the subject it might need even more cropping in.So you 1.5x crop your 24MP FF image and get a 16MP picture like your APS-C might have had.
For most of the subjects mentioned, this won't happen *too* often, and won't always have to be a 1.5x center crop either.
> Taking hikes and shooting nature needs APS-C sized gear.
Not really, no.
But certainly, an APS-C can be fine to great for most subjects on a hike. As can be a super zoom. Actually, want a bird? Here is a super zoom bird - at least 10x weight and size reduction to a srs birding APS-C, never mind more zoom and versatility! But that doesn't make it the "necessary" equipment, either. And the difference between FF and APS-C weight and size on a hike isn't nearly as big. 