Hi Jack,
It could would be nice if you would post some examples, preferably with raw files? IMHO Guillermo is right, highlight areas have large amount of shot noise, so that would absolutely dominate.
Do you happen to use a polariser? That would explain some issues. A polariser could make the red channel very dark. The Sony is probably balanced for available light while Hasselblad may be for studio/daylight.
This image compares highlight handling on three different cameras, P45+ (fake 16 bit), Sony A900 (12 bit) Sony A7rII (14 bits in a 16 bit envelope):
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58984278The second attachment shows the raw data from the white patch of the colour checker in the green channel. You can see that the raw data for that single patch is distributed over more than 1000 different number. Standard of deviation is 249. So, it doesn't really matter if that patch is represented by 12, 14 or 16 bits. In the highlight range even 12 bits has excess precision.
I am not saying that Hassy or whatever doesn't have better highlights, just saying that 12, 14 or 16 bits has nothing to do with that.
Best regards
Erik
I bet you can't show any bad gradation in sky/clouds with the Sony. In fact I bet you can't show two images taken with both cameras over the same scene where the gradation of sky/clouds is any better in your Hassie than in your Sony. The reason is simple math: both cameras produce RAW files with such a number of tonal levels in the sky/cloud areas that no device can display nor any human visual system can distinguish.
These are the number of different RAW values that 10/12/14 bit RAW files linearly encode:
Regards