>>4337694>M43's advantages are size, weight, and costAnd none of these are free
To be smaller and lighter, you must use much smaller apertures, "equivalently". The harsh truth about equivalence is 90% of the time, there is so much light that larger sensors do not "have" to shoot equivalently, they can use a lower and lower ISO while m43 bottoms out at the noise of FF ISO 400. There are also things that "equivalence" does not cover, like sampling rate, photosite size, and the rendering differences of different focal lengths regardless of sensor FOV. These things mean that even with the (measured) ISO and DOF roughly equalized (measured is important, otherwise your m43 will be underexposed at labeled equivalence and do even worse), the larger format will still look different. To most people, subjectively better.
And the inherent crop sensor issue: putting smaller and smaller pixels on an image circle eventually demands unrealistic levels of sharpness. High MP FF can cope because the imaging area is huge and you can throw some of the flaws away downscaling (but not all, if 61mp reveals ie: coma that 24mp would not, it's not going away easily). Crop sensors can not. If you want anything even CLOSE to the "look" achieved by cheap shit like a cheapo sony a7mk1 and a cheapo fe 85mm f1.8, you actually need to spend more.
>>4337712The equivalence bokeh gap isn't huge for how blurry the background is. f6 to f12 on a bird photo? its fucking nothing, everything that isnt the bird will still be blur. However, the two stops of ISO absolutely wrecks color and detail and will leave you AI coping.
Here's 56mm f1.2 vs f2.8 bokeh on aps-c. The actual blurriness is not that different. The background is still soup.
The CHARACTER of the bokeh is more important. Some lenses have hard edged OOF highlights (vintage primes), other double images in the OOF area (many m43 zooms do this). Larger formats typically have better bokeh character for less $$$.
