Frankly, I always remain suspicious of those using certain software unless they are VERY familiar with it. Hasselblad's Phocus being a prime example. I also must have missed the part about what lenses were used, and in the case of Hasselblad's optics, which version.
Most of all, in the headlong rush to meg count, and web sized comparisons as proof of something or another, I'm still not sure folks grasp the real world differences between all these imaging choices.
As Jorgen observed, " ...what is the comparison in real life photography, and on print at realistic viewing distances" ... to which I'd add the cropping factor that can happen in real life, and most certainly happens for commercial applications.
Attached is a little chart that gathers some basic info onto one sheet ... namely, actual sensor sizes as they relate to one another which indicates the degree of enlargement required for any given final application. In my experience the actual effect of "degree of enlargement" has a direct visual effect on the apparent feeling of depth, over-all sense of clarity, and degree of visual tonal gradations, and apparent effect of noise ... even at real world print viewing distances.
To that, I've added a Print Ratio overlay that indicates the efficiency of each sensor ratio as it relates to the most common print sizes. Where the color ratio diagonal line intersects the top edge of the sensor ratio boxes shows what you tossing out compared to other ratios. Not that everyone follows these print ratios, but they ARE the most used, ordered, and are most certainly common for many commercial applications.
So, to make a 30"X40" print from a H4D/50 or 60, you are basically using ALL of the sensor resolution requiring less enlargement percentage, compared to the S2 and D800 which are cropping out a fair amount of their resolution thus requiring an even greater enlargement percentage to make the same print. IMO, and direct experience this has an obvious, and sometimes profound effect on the apparent noise, tonal gradations and so on ... as it applies to a real world print.
I would hazard a prediction that as more of the 35mm DSLRs approach the 30 and 40 meg territory, MFD makers will simply abandon the crop frame versions of their backs and concentrate on fewer larger sized sensors with 60 meg the entry level, and go up from there. If ALL of their products are more concentrated, it should lead to more efficient manufacture and relative pricing ... or it'll simple be more speciality solutions with more and more specific custom applications like Phase's recent aerial and repro cameras, and Hasselblad's on-going aerial specialty products ... and expand outward from there.
Whether one needs that sort of IQ performance or wants it, is a personal decision.
-Marc
(Click graphic to make larger)
