Don't be disappointed when you do actual comparisons and realise there is actually very little difference.
For all the "simple fact that smaller pixels resolve more detail" proponents I have never, and I have asked lots of times, ever seen anybody actually illustrate that point to any worthwhile degree. There are lots of comparisons out there, I have posted my own many times, of same generation cameras but when you process each to their optimum it becomes very hard to distinguish the two even at 100% magnification.
Theory is wonderful. I like theory. But empirical testing is far more relevant to real-world applications. Ample empirical testing has shown that the 'reach advantage' of smaller pixels in smaller sensors is much
less than theory would suggest. In actual practice, the 'reach advantage' ranges from small to nonexistent to a disadvantage, depending on lens used, lighting, and subject distance.
Interestingly, many of those empirical tests come from people who used only crop bodies and espoused the 'reach advantage'...then started using a FF body.