Other than size, there really isn't much difference. Size is the reason for all the differences. For instance, size has to do with the quality of the image. Assuming that the film emulsions are the same, (and they are...same amount of resolution, same materials, etc.), and assuming that you will project the images that you make onto the same size screen, the 16mm will look noticebly better. This is because you have to blow the 8mm image up 4 times more than the 16mm image, and with film, the more you enlarge something, the more the flaws are magnified.

The next difference would be in equipment. 8mm stuff is smaller because the film is smaller and because it was designed with the consumer in mind. Thus it is often simpler. You do not always have as much control over the 8mm equipment as you do over 16mm... and the controls aren't always as accurate, being made more cheaply. Almost everything about 8mm is smaller and cheaper than 16mm and the look will almost always show this.

However... this is not to say that 8mm is a non-format. If 8mm fits the look you are going for, then by all means, use it. Robert Richardson mixed 35mm,16mm and 8mm in JFK (amoung others) for great effect.

"On a good gate, that's a wrap."

Annother difference is that 16mm produces a negative wheras 8mm is shot on color reversal because then you only need one treatment. This is just annother aspect of how 8mm is a consumer format whereas 16mm is more profesional.

Make Love Not War!