I am not splitting hairs, just exploding the myth about the extra reach of APS-C and M4/3 when you don’t take into account pixel density. You have now changed tack by talking about field of view, which is not what you meant in your previous posts. The narrower field of view is in fact a disadvantage, not an advantage, when you are doing bird and nature still photography - it’s more difficult to find your subject and when it gets closer it can overfill the frame. Video is a different matter of course. Canon changed the game when it brought in the 5DS several years ago and there is now the new world of high density FF sensors. And Nikon did it’s bit earlier with the 800+ series and now Sony.
Yes, i know about pixel density, im not a beginner.
How many FF cameras are out there with the same pixel density or a 20 MP apsc? One?
And how many can have the same speed of a 7D dor example? Zero? I am talking about Canon land.
Let's not talk about price.
The Sony A74 is better option than apsc because of wider focal length BUT that price is very different. Thats why i mentioned 6xxx series in the first post. I you don't have 4000 dollars for a body then apsc still offers better reach.