Upload & Sell: Off
If you're using a tilt-shift for DOF, you're probably also using a tripod, which renders the point moot. Also, there isn't a two stop advantage from m4/3 to full frame...it's about a stop, maybe slightly more, but not two. I know in theory it should be two...in practice, it's not.
Well it is also the case that if you are shooting close and need to both stop down and crank up the ISO, then you are probably running into low shutter speeds (after all that is why you are cranking up the ISO), so in many of those situations a tripod would be in order. I guess my general point is that it is only in a pretty small band of shooting (i.e., when you aren't on a tripod, you want more depth of field, if you stop down the shutter speed will drop too low for a hand held shot, so increase ISO is needed) that the depth of field advantage won't come into play. Note the full frame camera is not in a disadvantage here, it only isn't at an advantage. Now if the subject is static, then I would say in this situation it would probably be best to be using a tripod and with full frame a tilt shift lens would probably be great solution that again gives the full frame camera an advantage. So, IMO, it is still quite important that the full frame camera has the DOF advantage, which plays out in most but not all situations.