Is this a normal result for medium format at the 9x enlarge????

I was expose the negative at ISO 80, and then a was develop my negative in X-Tol at 1:1 dilution. Temperature, time and agitation from Data Sheet. Film T-Max 100.
And then I was enlarge my negative.
In the scan is the contact print, then crop from 18*18 cm., 30*30 cm., 40*40 cm., 55*55 cm.
Then I was scan this without correction at 300 dpi.

And in result I need some comments about quality of my photosystem. Is this a normal result for medium format at the 9x enlarge????
I don't have experience in this format cameras and lens, but when I use a small format Nikon with fix lenses I'm not sure that Nikon 50 1.8 was more quality at the same enlargement. Perhaps that Nikon 50 1.8 lens was little more sharp and because I was use a Ilford FP4Plus with D-23 little more grainy.......

I was use a Gitzo 5 series alluminium tripod, camera was Kiev 6S (made in USSR) with Carl Zeiss Jena Flectogon 50/4. Enlarger lens was Rodenstok Rodagon 80/4.

Dmitriy Shishkin from Russia With Best Regards.
http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/6205/21246004.0/0_7e897_9e9c6b47_orig

Oooo, please convey this thread to (there was a url link here which no longer exists) :^( I am stupid.

Your prints look fine to me. The uploaded images are small enough that detail is difficult to judge, but what I see looks good.

Mark Overton

Looks ok to me too. TMax 100 in Xtol is very sharp and fine-grained. It's hard to tell on such a small computer image, but if you're not happy, maybe you could expose a bit more and develop a bit less. The scene is difficult to meter because of the snow which sometimes indicates too short an exposure. It's a very contrasty scene. But please understand that a computer screen is not a substitute for a real picture!

Mark, john_s thanks for comments. I try to upload full size image, but is not easy..... This is the reason why I added a direct link to my file.
http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/6205/21246004.0/0_7e897_9e9c6b47_orig

john_s said:

But please understand that a computer screen is not a substitute for a real picture!

Click to expand...

I absolutely agree with this, but I have no other way to ask the opinion of colleagues from other countries....

I cannot see a thing wrong with the images, looks to have plenty of detail, everything seems fine.
Richard