Originally posted by Yamanobori ???
If they crop the 35mm to get the framing of the APS-C, how does that change anything?
As far as print quality, it is a moot point. There really is no effective difference, at least to choose one over the other even when not cropped.
if the terms are equal. but until the D800 they weren't equal if you cropped FF to APSC before the 645 you got a much lower res image than a top quality apc sensor was capable of (ie 6 mp from a D700 vs 16MP from a D7000)
with the D800 the crop will give similar performance to the D7000 (or K5) so now they are equal footing, in which case the Ff is the better choice because it allows the best of both worlds (until that pesky 24mp apsc sensor body arrives then the inequity starts again)
certainly if you are a birder and need the long reach the apsc has had an advantage up till now. If on the other hand you shoot a lot of WA FFhas held the advantage. sure there have been some good WA lenses developed for apsc but show me a 35 1.4 or a 24 1.4 equivalent in apsc - you can't because it doesn't exist. neither does a 50 1.2 or 1.4.
With the fast lenses that have been developed for FF the narrow DOF advantage of a 645 system has been negated somewhat, but there are other reasons for shooting 645 (or 6x6, 6x7,6x9,6x12,6x24)