Yes, I have in the past balanced all from 135 to 8x10. The secret was to standardize the post process. Kits of course are different but not much. As the format got larger, your requirements for sturdier tripods and light meters increased. Once you set up a kit though, you just need to do a 'day of shoot' edit to determine what you need for a particular assignment. Not brain surgery.
That said, the trusty Nikon Fm2 sits on a shelf most trips these days. My days of HCB inspiration are long over. If I just need an image, the Fuji Digital will do the trick a lot faster than the Nikon with little or any decay in image quality. Only issue is freaking shutter trip delay.
As far as MF, I have spent a lot of time and a lot of miles all over the country with the weight of my rb on my shoulder, with some spectacular days in the US South West, Paris France, the lowlands of Europe, the Pacific coast, River Road Plantations in Louisiana, etc... But... my style of shooting has changed. When I go out for images these days, the setup for MF isn't that much easier than LF. Still need a tripod, still need a meter. As such, my drive has been towards utilizing my LF (4x5 - 8x10) equipment. The end result justifies the exertion. As I get older, I look around and realize after I am gone, having 7000 unprinted MF negatives makes no sense.
300 or 400 LF negatives that please me so much more is all the reward I am ever going to have and frankly, all I need. So I now concentrate on keeping the Deardorff tuned up, mounting a few more process lenses, and actually getting out. The Mamiya still sits around for the day I change my mind.
Good luck on your search.
tim in san jose