IMO the best things about the Fuji are the longer maintenance of reciprocity and the fact that it is available in Quickloads. I absolutely love FP4, but for long exposures and/or the convenience of Quickloads, Fuji 100 is unmatched. I feel that in these situations, I will deal with the fact that I don't like the over all look of the film *as much* as FP4. I actually prefer getting a little grain with FP4 in small format and 645, so I find the Fuji a bit more smooth and bland. Not enough to overcome the advantages in those aforementioned situations, however. With 6x7, 6x9, and sheet film, no film has any visible grain in the size enlargements I do (usually 16x20 max., and rarely), except expired fast films will sometimes lose some sharpness and gain some grain. Others have called it "clinical", and I would agree that it is very modern looking and similar to Delta. Quite contrasty, quite sharp, and quite fine grained. I could deal with the reciprocity issue of FP4, but I try to always splurge for Quickloads when carrying my 4x5 out and about with the intent to shoot many pieces of film. It saves so much weight and all but eliminates the possibility of error or defect with film holders. I could hypothetically carry 100 pieces of film for a fraction of the size and weight of 50 film holders, and they would all be 100% dust free, light leak free, mechanical error free, and user error free. I wish Ilford would devise a similar system, because to me FP4 does look better overall.