I get the sense that LF is well worth scanning (no surprise there really), but scanned MF might not give me any better results than I get currently from my DLSR. I still hanker after some big Tri-X negs though
I still say scanned MF(6x7) is better quality than a dslr....at least in my experience....more dynamic range and more room to push the file around in photoshop...those dslr files deteriorate a lot faster than my negs. not to mention the difference in look due to format size.
i have a 9000 i scan with but, if i had the cash i'd get a creo iqsmart in a heartbeat......not so much a huge difference in sharpness but in the color depth and the smoothness of the tonal gradations....it's like night and day between the nikon and the creo.