For several I have been using a Rollei 6008 and lenses from 40-250 - and like it a lot!
At the moment a 10000 euro digital back makes commercial sense for what I do (parttime professional wedding & portrait photographer and some landscape sells as well). The more expensive backs are sure nice to have, but a bit more than what I would earn from it the next 3 to 4 years.
A good photo dealer here in the Netherlands now has a demo Ixpress 384c or 384 on offer. Including a Rollei adapter and image tank it stays within my budget.
Would such a back still be a good choice, or are the newer backs so much better that this wouldn't be a sensible choice?
I'm a Hasselblad (formerly Imacon) dealer here in the US. The 384C can produce very high quality files as a result of it's multi-shot function. Single shot mode quality is excellent as well. Generally.
Now, more specifically, here are the issues for you. You're wasting a bit of money on the multi-shot because you're not likely to use it as a wedding/portrait/occasional landscape photographer. If it was a 96C, it would make more sense and be more cost-appropriate to your situation, because the 96C uses the same chip as the 384C, but only captured in single shot mode, and as a result costs less than a 384C. What I mean, is that with the 384C, you may be over-paying for features you won't use. Of course, this dealer may be making a hell of a deal, so...
Regardless, a 384C or a 96C even will present the following challenges to you on a Rollei platform:
*The chip is only 36.9mmx36.9mm, so wide angle is out. Possibly not an issue for your people shooting (depending on your style), but certainly a discounter for landscape.
*With 16MP, moire will be a much more frequent issue than a 22MP chip, for example, as well as other single shot issues, like color artifacting.
*Your look won't reflect medium format so much as 35mm in terms of depth of focus because of the smaller size of the imaging sensor.
*The LCD of the 384C (like many digital backs) is not particularly useful. Umm, well, it sucks.
*You may find the image bank cumbersome and unmanagable for a wedding.
*If the ImageBank goes, you're dead, so a backup would be recommended for wedding work (add about another $2,000 US).
Not to get you down...
All that being said, I have customers using H1D's for wedding/portrait work who love it. The Hasselblad system is a perfectly viable medium format system. Image quality rivals any other digital back. Flexcolor software is a very powerful, speedy, but much misundertood application. A well trained dealer is a must to show you the secret sauce of Flexcolor. The ImageBank does provide for 1100 exposures, all about 1.5 seconds apart without pause, in other words, no buffer. Not a bad tool to have for weddings, or baby portraits.
I think your main point of decision is wide angle, and some patience for the post work you'll have to do at times for moire, etc. As an entry into medium format - if you're getting a great price (like $4,000 - $8,000, and can spring for an extra ImageBank (along with backup cables), it's a consideration. I guess for me, the price would be the key factor. It may be better to save up wait. Better solutions are out there now for $16,000 US, with more surely to arrive. In fact, you've probably seen the refurbished $7,695 Aptus 17 thread. And Hasselblad themselves will eventually ship a 31MP 44mmx33mm product likely priced in the teens. Just some considerations, that's all. Hope that helps.