I have what I believe are my perceived differences between these two, but the only differences that seem to be apparent based on the Ilford literature are:
1. PQ is not called "rapid," while MG is (though the development times are the same for both developers)
2. MG gives a "neutral image tone with most papers," while PQ gives a "slightly warm of neutral" tone.
3. MG is not recommended for film processing, while PQ is called usable for big film (but not for 35mm).
4. MG can be used at 1:14, while this is not recommended for PQ.
5. MG has a greater capacity (100 sheets 8x10 RC, as opposed to 70 with PQ)
I notice that the capacity of PQ at 1:9 matches the capacity of MG at 1:14, when using RC paper. Is the only big difference that MG more potent?
It would be interesting to hear what you all have to say about these two developers when compared to each other, and even more interesting to hear what Simon from Ilford has to say about it. What are the actual differences in the images?
I have to special order PQ from Freestyle, and most people I talk to have never even heard of it. I am very interested to hear why there are both varieties. Who uses which one, and why is PQ harder to find, while MG is everywhere?
Do we even want to get into where Bromophen fits in with MG and PQ?
I find that when comparing two Ilford products on paper, it can be difficult to figure out exactly what the differences are enough to make a choice. A comparison chart of some sort, and detailed technical publications, would be a real help. It seemed to be much more easy with Kodak chems, but maybe it is just me! Why does Ilford hold out on so much published technical information compared to Kodak?