8x10 has a clear advantage over anything else out there (4x the negative size of 4x5)...if you need detail 8x10 is the way to go...handling it is another question....4x5 does not really have any clear advantages over a P45 (in regards to detail) so the much much harder workflow is ....a user preference....
my last 4x5 was a toyo field camera, super light and small, only used the preloaded fuji film ...much easier to deal with, no loading/unloading, no dust....was a fun toy, but unless you make huuuuge prints, not really worth the effort....the real advantage of 4x5/8x10 is of ocurse the T/S, R/F on front and back...and all this can also be achieved by mounting the P45 on a 4x5 camera....and when stitching the files, the detail of 8x10 can be achieved from a P45 on a 4x5 camera with much less effort and hassle (and in the long run, a lot less money...) and if the files are digitized anyway and printed on a inkjet/whatever...there is no "analog advantage" anyway......
in the oooooold days, people had a horse draw carriage with a darkroom set up in the back...made the emulsion themselves, applied it to the plates, took the shot and processed the plates....all somewhere in the middle of nowhere...it worked...until they died an early death from the vapors (but that is a different story)....i know a guy who used to shoot daguerrotypes....had to make his own plates too....there is no logic behind this, but that is what he needed to get his point across....
from a practical standpoint, digital is the way to go, but that does not mean anything....
i think of all film, 4x5 and 8x10 will be around the longest, there is more to it then just logic and detail....there is a rythum, a certain celebration of the image....has to be experienced to understand....
on a sidenote....i heard of a lab in NYC (beth...something) that will offer an enlarger that will enable users to print digital files onto photopaper...it literally lets you print from a digital negative....
