It amuses me that the people who obsessively think full frame is the only acceptable format
Who is saying FF is the only acceptable format? Saying FF is better is objectively true, but that doesn’t mean APS-C is not acceptable. That would be rather hypocritical for anyone who shoots FF to claim, since medium format is objectively better than FF.
Personally, I routinely use cameras with different sensor sizes, FF when feasible and APS-C or an iPhone when portability and convenience are more important. Compromise isn’t a bad thing.
Yep , you're very lucky to be able to afford a 600mm f/4 lens but very few people can and personally I wouldn't want one even if I could afford one because they're far too heavy to hand hold.
If I could afford one I'd choose the EF400 DO ii as it's light enough to hand hold and works great with T.Cs
I'd always choose a crop sensor given the choice.
People say you can just crop the image of a full frame sensor anyway but why use the full frame if you need to crop every time ? Just have a cropped sensor.
That’s your chosen compromise, and good for you. But it's sad that people can't acknowledge they are compromising, and feel the need to claim that their choice is objectively best (a claim which may not be true, and is often easily disproven), instead of simply claiming that their choice is the best
for them personally, which is certainly true and really impossible to argue with.
Yep , I suspect that Canon thinks that bird photography (which is what a lot us 7D crowd like ) is a worthwhile segment otherwise why did they spend millions developing af algorithms for birds ?
How do you know what they spent? They already had AF tracking and eye AF algorithms. Adapting them to birds would not be that difficult (based on my experience working with teams of software engineers developing code for automated image analysis). Do you believe that the car and motorcycle photography segment also justified spending millions of dollars on tracking algorithms and that's why Canon is adding that to the R3? Far more likely that these algorithmic tweaks aren't terribly difficult or costly. Sort of like the astrophotography versions of cameras – developed at minimal effort as a minor modification to an existing technology, which makes a lot of sense for a small market segment.
Consider the update frequency for the 7-series, and compare that to the update frequency for the xxD series and Canon's FF body lines. What does that say about the relative importance of the market
to Canon?