Repro/copy work is what I use my 4-shot Hasselblad for and it’s superb - DR, colour, etc.
Hasselblad’s new(ish) 6-shot offering looks fantastic, if you trust the PR.
My point still stands; in any kind of pressured environment, where time is money, a 16-shot offering looks like regression to me. I await the (unbiased) reviews.
99% of the time spent shooting anything that would be amenable to any sort of pixel shift technique consists of setting up the shot - subject, backdrops, lights, cameras, tripods. Actually taking the shot takes almost no time - and, if multiple exposures are exposed, the camera does it all for you once the remote trigger is pressed. Whether it's a single exposure, four exposures or sixteen exposures, the time difference is minimal - seconds at most - compared to the many minutes spent setting up the shot. And, once the shots are taken, the computer does all the work combining them, with minimal human input.
A sixteen-shot technique has a significant advantage over current four-shot techniques. By getting a true RGB reading for every pixel, without relying on interpolation, colour artifacts are almost completely eliminated. At 240MP - likely outresolving the lens - moire is also almost completely eliminated. With a four-shot technique that uses full pixel shifts, you eliminate the colour artifacts but don't get the resolution increase. With a four-shot technique that uses half pixel shifts, you get the increased resolution, but still get the colour artifacts. In most subjects, the artifacts will be subtle, but, if you're going to the effort of pixel shifting anyway, you're probably after every little bit you can get.
I could see this technique being taken to the extreme for certain macro subjects (e.g. dead bugs or flowers), in combination with focus stacking and averaged exposure (HDR being unnecessary with controlled lighting). Sixteen exposures, repeated eight times and averaged for an effective ISO of 12.5, focus stacked perhaps 10 times to get the whole object in focus, for a total of 1280 frames (or more, if more stacked layers are required). Probably overkill, but someone's bound to try it, if only to get a tack-sharp, flawless, everything-in-focus, billboard-sized print of an ant.
