I would like to see some facts or opinions about the full frame vs. the APS frame size sensors on DLSR's. A lot of digital photographers hold to the view that the APS sensors give a higher quality image for the photograph.
The discussion seems to center about the "sweet spot" of the lens. The edges of the APS are sharper than that of a full frame (35mm) image. To me this has always been a problem with the 35mm film lenses or any camera lens for that matter. The center is usually, I almost said always, sharper or should I say crisper than the edges. To get the better edge resolution we were expected to pay the higher price for the "PRO" lenses. If you were to crop to the same size as the APS sensor image wtih the full frame sensor image using the center of the image. Then enlarge both images to say a 16x20 image or larger, who or what would win. Maybe someone will try this now that there are cameras with simular mpixs available now. These are namely from Nikon, Canon, and Kodak (maybe the new Sony). I know that cost is a big factor in favor for the APS sensors but the prices are coming down.
I know that the well size, among other factors, makes a difference between the APS and full frame sensors imaging ability. Has the imaging technology of the full frame (35mm) sensor outraced the lenses imaging technology. Does the larger sensor really mean you'll get stronger images with all others factors equal?