Hi,
If shooting on free hand in available light, stabilisation may play a major role. But, I don't think stabilisation is a decisive factor.
Why? To begin with I would guess that MFD shooters in general use the cameras where ultimate image quality is sought. In my view and experience this mostly precludes handheld shooting. Now, I am fully aware that some MFD users shoot technical cameras handheld from helicopters, but I would say in general that MF DSLRs are best used on tripod, with mirror lockup, or with high speed strobes. Under those optimal conditions image stabilisation wouldn't help.
With present day CMOS 35 mm had a significant advantage in readout noise, allowing for extending DR in the deep shadows or as an alternative use high ISOs. Those two things are the opposing sides of the same coin.
But, the latest generation of MFD is based on Sony CMOS technology, like the technology employed in Nikon D800/D810 and the Sony A7/A7r. So both MFD and 35mm uses similar generation CMOS from the same vendor. Some Pentax lenses also have image stabilisation.
The present generation MF CMOS sensors are 44x33 mm, making them 1.7X larger than a 24x36mm sensor. So, they collect 70% more light, giving something like 30% improvement in Signal Noise Ratio (SNR).
Also, linear size is around 1.3 times larger. So if an MF-lens reaches say 80% MTF at 20 lp/mm a 35mm lens would need 80% MTF at 26 lp/mm. Here I would suggest the high end lenses like The Zeiss Otus 85/1.4 or the Batis 85/1.8 may reach and surpass the best Hasselblad V generation lenses in spit of the format advantage. See enclosed MTF for the legendary (*) 100/3.5 Planar for the Hasselblad and the Otus 85/1.4.
With CCD higher resolutions are possible, up to 80 MP recently and the sensor surface is larger so less demand is made on the lens.
So my guess is:
- 50 MP CMOS on MF probably dominates 36-50 MP CMOS on 35mm in most aspects.
- 36-50MP CMOS on 35mm with excellent lenses may match and surpass 50MP MFD CMOS with less excellent lenses
- 80 MP CCD with 1.0 crop factor combined with excellent lenses and excellent lenses will be hard to beat, and plays reasonably well with symmetric ultrawides
This may put 30-50MP CCD in a less enviable position, but the competitive situation may press the prices of those systems in the second hand market, so more photographers can get their feet wet in the low end MFD sector. Keep in mind, those systems are still capable of excellent images.
As a final thought, we also need to consider maintenance costs. According to Lensrentals, DSLR repairs are on the order of 350$. I would guess MFD repairs are ten times more expensive. That may also be a consideration for those who regard green backs a finite asset that should be spent wisely.
Best regards
Erik
(*) The Planar 100/3.5 was intended for tasks like architecture and arial photography. It was probably the sharpest of the classical Hasselblad lenses for the V-series. The last generation of Zeiss lenses for the Hasselblad include some very good designs like the 40/4 CFE IF and the Tele-Superachromat T* 300/2.8.