I'm genuinely curious about one thing which I've never understood.
Assuming the same pixel count, aside from the higher pixel density (which we know is not always a good thing), what is it that you gain with an APS-H sensor versus FF and cropping? It seems with FF you get more control over DoF, the ability to go wide if you need to, better low-light performance, and so on; whereas if you crop the final image back to an APS-H equivalent field of view, you're back where you started, just having had more options along the way. The only obvious benefits that jump out at me are the price, and the ability to discard the corners of the frame, which are generally not problematic on the long lenses favored by most APS-H aficionados. Is there something I'm missing?
Thanks in advance for clarifying.