>>3344618full frame gathers twice as much light, is literally twice as good in low light.
resolution is dictated by the lens, not the sensor, but the bigger the sensor, the more forgiving it is on your lens. imagine painting a picture on a stamp, then the same image on a billboard, then resized them both to A4. The larger image comes across sharper and with more detail. Same thing happens with EVERY lens you use.
sensors are falling in price, crop cameras and lenses don't hold their value at all any more.
So if you want soft images, that look like shit in low light or with pushed shadows and gear that won't be worth 30% of what you paid for it, go crop.
>You can't tell teh differenceNo, YOU can't tell the difference, with a bit of practice it will be all too obvious.
>I don't want to spend thousandsNo one suggested you did, Sony A7 and Canon 5Dii can be had for under £500, d750 for 700 (nikon are a fucking ripoff tho)
>>3344623Correct,
If you are a professional sports or wildlife photographer, with access to several multi thousand dollar fast tele primes, the D500 makes for a fantastic second body. Just a shot in the dark though, that's not the case here.
