Clearly my intension with the O/P, is on how Hasselblad could make back the damage that closing their system has done. H5X is certainly a good movement in that direction, but there is more that can be done... They obviously have to offer their backs for the H5X but also for other camera makers, but since a physical redesign (new aesthetics) of the backs is necessary for the success of such a decision, I believe that if they offer the current backs with the H5X as an alternative choice, it could be really beneficial for them...
Good lenses, or new VFs, or other improvements of parts, are certainly increasing the appeal of a maker... But certainly Hassy is not under handicap from competition on that matter... I believe they better first work where their marketing handicap is.... meaning that their system is less communicative than competition with associate equipment that photographers use.
Let me give you an example, the new Cambo Actus or Arca F-universalis are cameras designed for use with MFDBs that have excellent LV quality, this means that one that wants such a camera he'll have to replace his back with a modern CMOs back (which he'll obviously choose to fit the MF system that he is using)... But Hasselblad, although that it has three backs for the H-system (50C-50Cms-200Cms) with the additional advantage that two of the backs are MS designs which no other maker offers currently, they don't offer the backs for sale at all... One has to change camera system if he wants his back to work on those new tech cameras... Yet, photographers don't (usually) act under pressure, they invest on what is first priority, then they integrate it in their system and optimise the performance of it and then they may (or not) upgrade the peripherals... which is exactly what Hasselblad has suffered (and is still suffering) after they closed their system.
