With all due respect to the above posters, here's a different perspective: that in our discussion of the future of MFDB, we are standing on the wrong foot. Too often, the criteria used in such pondering is the "where is the DSLR-optimized technology?", and if/when/how that technology can or will migrate to MFDB-based camera platforms or backs.
I'd suggest an alternate position: that MFDB-based work is really the electronic-era equivalent to LF work of years past and we should look at it in those terms. Its either equivalent to 4x5 or 8x10, depending on the back, sometimes with movements, sometimes without. But the thoughtfulness and the more profound results, the care in the discipline of the image, all harken back to LF work of the past 150 years, not the cel-phone snaps of the past 5 years.
The addition of other technologies to MFDB that mimic the DSLR world is, IMHO, not essential to this work flow. If they come, perhaps they should be considered gravy. MFDB cannot, and probably (!) should not, compete on that front - it will lose that battle as its terms are set by smaller, lighter, mirrorless technology that, as Eronald points out, comes from cel phones, sold in the millions. MFDB can't garnish the investment heft to compete in that world.
Those of us who love MFDB and large format (I'd like to suggest we're cousins) should appreciate what we have, and work within that discipline. We are better off accepting that, instead of regretting what it's not. Sure I'd like hand-held, low light, high ISO backs, but if they don't come out, or are too expensive, they are not essential to the work flow. Perhaps the wedding photographer who wants to shoot MF needs this, but lots of us work in a slower, more contemplative way.
Those with MFDB who don't see the difference with the smaller CMOS "instacameras" might simply be missing something here. Maybe the difference isn't so noticeable for all shots, but its there. Hey, there was a political campaign photographer who shot with 4x5 film and got wonderful results. Different, but still special. If they can, surely we can?
