Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson View Post
Given lens design limitations, and just how much resolution a film like TMax 100 is capable of, you often end up with a much smaller resolution advantage in a larger negative compared to 35mm than most people are willing to accept. Of course there are things like grain and tonal shifts to consider as well, but on pure resolution terms the difference between 35mm and 4x5 is a lot less profound than you would think.

But again, I think this is maybe an individual thing, where some of us really care about that smooth grain, or whatever else a view camera supposedly does better, and others simply don't care.

I know that Panatomic-X was a slightly unique, but in the same breath perhaps it's a good idea to simply work with a film like Ilford Pan-F+, accept the differences, and move on with making more good photographs?
It's not resolution per-se that I am after. Perhaps it's the smooth grain. But I'm not willing to switch to Chromogenic film. It's not that I want "no" grain.

I did try hard to find a replacement, and found various issues with non-Kodak film which led me back to Kodak (p.s. I work for Kodak but the opinions and positions I take are my own and not necessarily those of EKC).

But I can say I am happy with the direction I am going. Larger film, when I grain a little finer than Panatomic-X... Gives me that... Even when the film is 400 speed.

For the 35mm work that I do, often 400 speed gives me the result I am happy with. (And when not... I have a tiny little stash of Panatomic-X that I bring to bear).