I was an avid thirtyfive mm user but some how started verging in the direction of medium format. Probably because I just lack patience, I'd rather say, great, I shot two rolls today and now I'll develop them. That being said, two rolls of 35mm = 72 images or 20 xpan negs, where as I can get 24 or less images out of 6x6 film on the same day. It may be thirty-five shooters are verging into the less is more aesthetic. Funny, with digital the tendency is the opposite, maybe this is a psycological backlash against digital technic. Another thing, it's a bit disconcerting to post images on line let's say that you toiled to process, and see that a lot more people post digital with less hassel. So in order to justify doing the analog bit, people are aiming at the more serious gear, The stuff used traditionally for magazine work, 35mm tends toward journalism. Black and white probably predominates since it is easier to do yourself. In my area, a lot of the labs that produce color services have dissapeared. Didn't Lee Freidlander or somebody equate cameras by calibre of munitions, Maybe Raulf Gibson? " A leica is like a nine mm luger of p38, hasselblad is like a shotgun, an 8x10 is like a howitzer? I suppose digital cameras are more like lazers.