Really, you don't know what you're talking about. Have you ever shot full frame? Maybe 35mm film, with a decent, fast prime? It's not about noise or dynamic range. It's about focal length, composition and subject isolation. Even lowest noise figures cannot "fix" the geometry of the sensor.
That's for the purist.
In film days the rather dreadful 35mm film was good enough for 99.9% of the population even when 120 roll film was way better.
It's the same now, my wife's Casio EX-ZR100 churns out stuff as good as most 35mm film efforts when the light is fair to good. What more is needed? And that camera has 24-300mm equivalent and slips into her purse neatly.
The sweet spot though for quality compacts seems to be the LX4/S100 size sensor and about 10 MP but the 99.9% again really only need the 1/2.33" sensor.
The whole idea of the digital camera era is to produce good enough results for as low a cost as possible to manufacture, and small sensors are way cheaper to make than whopping great FF sensors. And then there's the lenses, smaller sensors use shorter focal lengths and that equals smaller glass and less expensive to produce.
The real future is most people using the 1/2.33" sensor (or smaller if they all migrate to phone use), some seeking more quality and more versatility will use the M4/3 or APS-C size sensors and interchangeable lenses. Only strict quality needs will require FF or larger for maybe 0.1% of users or less, and the cost to buy will be appropriate to size.
Dreams of FF for the masses are totally out of order, too damn expensive to make.
Regards............ Guy
