>>3366682Hey, I'm the guy whose post you tried to swap MF for FF in.
> Full frame is only an advantage for a very specific sort of professional photographerPretty much any pro photographer with the possible exception of wildlife photographers (who might want the extra reach, but even then) can benefit from full frame.
> worse autofocus systemThe autofocus systems in full frame cameras from all of the major brands are equal to or better than the crop equivalents. Compare with medium format cameras, which tend to have muuuuch worse autofocus systems than even modern APS-C DSLRs. E.g., the GFX 50 line only does contrast-detect autofocus whereas most modern full frame lines (minus Leica) have phase-detect AF systems.
> sucks down more powerCIPA battery life for the GFX50s: 400 frames
CIPA battery life for a Canon 5Ds: 700 frames
CIPA battery life for a Canon 7D Mk II: 670 frames
CIPA battery life for a Sony A7III: 710 frames
CIPA battery life for a Sony A6500: 350 frames
Full frame wins on battery life.
>slowerGFX 50S: 3fps
a7III: 10fps
>heavierFull frame cameras are not significantly heavier than crop cameras of the same product level. E.g., the 7DII and 5Ds are only 20 grams apart.
> outweigh the potential benefits (slightly better image quality at low ISO).Full frame's benefits are one stop better image quality at all ISOs, better dynamic range, sharper images with the same quality lens, and the option of shallower depth of field. Most of these are benefits it has over BOTH crop cameras AND medium format cameras. E.g., most full frame cameras go up to at least ISO25,600 whereas the GFX maxes out at 12,800
> Sony fanboys like to bring up full frame as a reason why their system doesn't need APS-C,Just doesn't make sense, since Sony has a bunch of APS-C cameras.
