Well, actually we can use those 35mm lenses of yours for macro work on our large format cameras. Let's see we will use a SMC Pentax 50 mm macro on both the 35mm camera, and the 8x10 camera and make a full frame of a small object. Will the 35mm negative appear sharper than the 8x10. Yes it will, will 8x10 print from the 35mm appear sharper than the 8x10 print from the 8x10? Hell, no! The apparent sharpness of the 35mm negative is just because the detail is finer, after all it is 1/8 the size it is on the 8x10. The information on both films are exactly the same, but the 35mm negatives information is going to degrade when it is enlarged.
It is easier to work with the 35, but the final quality of the print is going to be better with the 8x10. How about DOF? In the 8x10 is it going to be the same. DOF is controlled by diameter of the aperture and magnification. The diameter of the aperature is identical, as it is the same lens. The magnification is the same as we are making and 8x10 from both. Now, the remaining difference is the film grain in the print, and the smoothness of tonality in the print. As both are 8x worse in the print from the 35mm negative. The 8x10 wins hands dowm. Don't argue with me, go out and try it. In fact when ever you come across two opinions about anything that matters to you, go out and try it. That is what I always do, you will be suprized at the things everybody knows that just ain't so. I figure that comes from someone writing it down in a book somewhere, the next author reads it and says that makes sense, and repeats it, five more authors repeat it, and now it is gosple, but when you actually try it it turns out the first author never did. Photography has more than its share of things that everybody knows, but isn't true. Usually, the guy that tries it gets debunked because everybody just knows he is wrong. Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
