What bugs me is the chip many have on their shoulders about whatever gear they have and for some reason feeling inferior. They can't embrace the difference and exploit those differences but instead spend way to much time trying to prove how alike they are instead of going out doing what is important. Making photographs. The most important part of it all is finding equipment that best works for each individual. Full frame and crop are different. What makes one better than the other is personal. What works best for each individual is all that matters. I've already explained what I think the FF look is. One thing that FF is better at is wide and super wide lenses. If you shot in that world then the choice should be FF. Maybe you don't so the difference is not that relevant. These camera's are all tools. Clearly the tool Tom needs is not the tool I need. Doesn't make my tool better or inferior to his tool, just different. And my tool is clearly better for me as his is for him. So instead of trying to make everything the same, figure out what best captures your vision. All of these cameras are fully capable of capturing ones vision the real key is one has to see.
Agreed. My whole point was that there is no such thing as a "full frame look" IMO. Most people incorrectly think of that as background blur, bokeh etc...which can all be done easily on smaller sensor cameras as well. Ive shot many portraits with MFT and APS-C sensor cameras over the years and have never found them incapable of producing the same look I can get on a FF sensor camera. In fact, most of my published work for magazines and in-store displays have been shot on APS-C cameras. Anyhow, just for fun, that first image I posted was the 6D with the Canon 135 f/2 and the 2nd was the Panasonic GX8 with the Olympus f/1.8