I'm about to upgrade by old Omega B66 condenser to a Saunders/LPL 4550 with a VCCE head. I'm currently working on reprinting a portfolio of 35mm negatives, which will be the first negatives I work on in the new enlarger. I've always read about the differences between diffusion and condenser enlarging, but I've never actually used a diffusion enlarger so I'm wondering if anyone can comment on real world comparison experiences with the following: -Contrast: On my condenser setup I am standardized on around grade 1. With existing negatives, can I expect to be on around grade 2 with diffusion? -Accutance: I'm a little worried about the accutance factor - will the prints actually appear less sharp from a diffusion setup? -Dust spots etc: Does diffusion actually lessen the effects of dust and small negative defects? When I attended a John Sexton workshop, his opinion was that my prints would look just as sharp on a diffusion enlarger, and that I would not be sorry, even with small format negatives. However I'm a little confused by this. If diffused light helps hide dust and small imperfections, wouldn't that automatically mean a decrease apparent sharpness? I always thought of it as a zero-sum game, like pretty much anything else in the photographic process - ie you gain something here, and lose something there. It's always a compromise, is it not? If a diffusion enlarger gives you high sharpness, AND reduces the appearance of grain, dust and imperfections, it sort of violates that zero-sum law. And in that case why would anyone not use a diffusion enlarger for 35mm?