FF entry level camera cannot currently be as cheap as APS.
But an EVF FF could be $1500 and EVF APS could be $500.
I'm not sure how you figure this. $1500 is roughly half the cost of the Canon 5D which is the most "economical" of the FF cameras out today. If the #1 seller of Digital SLR cameras in the world cannot generate enough volume to lower the price on their "low-end" FF then I am not sure how you figure anyone can get down to $1500.
And that is before we factor in the cost of the R&D to move the whole thing to EVF from OVF.
About that I know and agree.
But not everybody has children paying football or “hunts” birds.
There are many landscapers that don’t need such a speed.
You are right, of course. Although my guess is there a lot more "generalitsts" who want the speed then there are guys are who are just landscapers. Granted, I have no proof, just a feeling.
Any case, if you spend $1500 for a FF, you can spend more $500 for
a fast OVF.
Moreover, if FF would be produced in large quantity the cost would
be reduced (the cost is given by the R&D and production equipment,
that any case Canon has to pay, because already has FF to produce).
May be (not sure but may be), a FF replacing in body IS (used APS
size) could be cheaper.
Producing in large quantity is not really the issue. Selling in large quantity is. The problem here is that FF will likely never again be the top seller. APS-C gives great results for most photographers these days, even many pros. Due to it's reduced size, a camera with it will always be cheaper and that is true for many reasons, not just sensor size. Since it will likely always be cheaper (and I am guessing a lot cheaper), APS-C will pretty much always outsell FF and my guess is that sales difference will always be large.
There is the issue. If the manufacturers can't sell it in big volume, the price will probably not come down like you are thinking. Sure, someday the technology behind it will get cheaper and the price will come down but so too will APS-C. We are already seeing cameras for sub $800 prices in a market where just a bit over year ago Canon made big news with the first sub $1000 camera. If the rumors are true and Sony is working on a model in the "3D" range below the A100 that will likely be a sub $600 camera. The specs are already out on the Nikon D40 which is targeting the same market.
All of these cameras will do better with the mass market than a FF camera would, even if you could get the FF price down to $1500. The average guy who wants to move to a DSLR so they can get better quality than their current P&S just won't pony up twice the money for FF with the current quality of APS-C. At least, I don't believe they will.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bobfloyd 
