Except the focus length x wide angle with sensor details, anything else.

Full frame was expensive, especially on lens.
Others than that, do you really print it out for each photos are you taken?

So far mine only post in FB, others than that just happy for own.

Cause FX or DX dose not feels that diff.

But I found that Nikon D7200 has going limitation of sensor and produce better in image quality of detailed.

For normal landscape was fine, if you are micro shooter or close up photos, there was limit, unlike D600 can see much clearly of fine detail on each objects.

http://www.premiumbeat.com/blog/full-frame...-really-matter/

Better low light and bokehliciousness on FF, even for FB post only. And stop using "was". It still "is".

I shoot mainly family photos. If there's a reason to go FF it would be the ISO advantage alone, so I can shoot comfortably at 6,400 to 12,800 (if there is a need to). Old people don't like the flash.

From 6400-12,800 the only recent body.
D600 & D800 don't have that capable

What is your max "comfortable" (not technical maximum) iso you can shoot with your apsc? I can "comfortably" go up to iso 6400 on FF. It can comfortably go further up to 12000 on newer body.

Not really sure what is your real question about? Are you thinking of buying D600/D800 and just need good reason to buy one?

Urm really? I remember seeing D700 shooting at ISO 6400 before.

Canon 6D as well is almost 4 years old with the capability to shoot 12800 and above. No idea which planet he's talking about that only recent bodies have that capability...

FF DSLR if u need
1. Highest level of image resolution
2. Low light performance
3. Good bokeh
4. Wide angle needs
5.

D600/800 shoots from 3,600 ISO and beyond really have lot of noise, depend your acceptable level.
For me I would prefer cleaned background as well.

Have no argument with older bodied.

Ok ok after my trip, I will going for FF

If you're going to FF, do make sure to splurge on lens as well. It's equally important.

Spending for finding happy
24mm f1.8G with D7200

errr.....no.1 is not necessary true depending on the res on the FF.

FF has its own place depending on what you plan to shoot. Portrait & landscape looks better on FF due to its easier to isolate subject and less distortion cause you can use longer focal lens. If you primarily shoot wildlife and sports, apsc is preferable to get that extra reach and megapixel per sensor area resolution count.

what was the point of this thread? /:

I think TS just want some justification why need to buy FF before he decides to buy one.

Bingo... Otherwise throwing for money and never get the right end result

Actually I got my right answer already.

Thank you guys for clarify as well.
Next step, know that, what should be do.

of course depending on the resolution on the FF....can u get 36MP from APS sensor?

you can get similar image using APS with shorter focal length lens with less distortion as well..but bokeh will not be as good as FF.