Is it possible that the commercial aspects of MF are why we always hear these "MF is dead/dying/pining for the fjords questions? One (at least all one of me) tends to conjure up images of landscape and architecture done with LF, news/photojournalism with 35mm, and school portraits, weddings, etc., with MF. It's a solid, bread-and-butter business piece of eqiupment, which doesn't have the sex appeal of ULF, or instant recognition of 35. It's invisibility is a sign of its success. Just curious, as I know that when I haul my Bender out, that people stop to look at it, ask to feel the wood, treat it a little more carefully at the airport; it comes with some sort of popular instant cred. On the other hand, it could be a mixture of LF people too kind to ask " you shoot with *that*" and midwestern cherry-wood worshipers. In the case of MF, I've had a Mamiya TLR on campus, and in the same areas, and people presume I'm photographing for the campus. There's more of an 'Oh' reaction, and then they stay out of the way of the camera. Much less curiosity, for a not much less exotic looking piece of eqiupment.

On a personal note, I like the format, the choice of film, and the portability, but it's not much less bulky than the 4x5, and as there are no movements, quite often just not versatile enough for the weight involved.