I have a different take on the question. Why go MF these days? Bear with me ...
Although retired from my rat-race Advertising creative career, I used it as a way to win free-lance photography assignments and photo related work like digital retouching. It helps pay for the crushing expense of gear as technology marches onward.
My most recent expression of gear has been Sony mirrorless to replace DSLR systems. An A7R-IV plus a set of rarified lenses able to fully resolve that full-frame 61 meg state of the art sensor. My medium format kit is a Leica S(006) and six Leica lenses with Central Shutters (CS). It also operates with a focal plane shutter, making it more versatile than any 35mm.
When acting as a retoucher, I deal with very expensive commercial photography ... (which is a whole other conversation about infrastructure and organization unrelated to gear). I see end results from Phase One, Hasselblad H6D, and recently Fuji GFX100s ... all of them are super high meg, large sensor images used in a very broad array of applications. The clients are SUPER F'ing picky. All this stuff is for top national advertising and promotion.
(NOTE: Any comparison of smaller formats and larger ones is going to be antidotal and subjective ... BUT, mine is based on observations over a broad range of work by various other photographers over the past few years. Make what you will of it:
1) None of the work was shot with 35mm.
2) Every shot displayed an incredible sense of rendering the critical subtleties of color and dynamic range. I've not personally seen this level of color correct capture from any 35mm anything, including my own carefully planned commercial work with tech assistance, PAs and Profoto lighting using my Sony kit.
3) Some the retouching I have to do is of details so the image is product correct at time of publication ... it requires enormous enlargement to isolate these details and fix them ... the MFD files are pliable and clarity is not an issue.
In addition, I compared the A7R-IV multi-shot ability to MFD MS ... and my old Hasselblad 39 meg MS back kicked its ass in terms of color separation and simple fidelity. The MS on these 35mm cameras may increase something, but isn't worth the effort IMO.
Lastly, I still select the Leica S with its 37meg sensor and S optics over the 61 meg Sony for anything that really matters ... my eye subjectively sees the difference esthetically, and there is a look and feel I find lacking in most Sony images (except maybe a few shots using a Leica M lens on the Sony
![Wink ;) ;)]()
).
Trust me, a more fixed income and having other priorities has put a damper on the unbridled gear acquisitions that was once my history ... it'd be great if I could consolidate everything to a Mirrorless kit ... HOWEVER, not going to happen because it'd be an uninspiring and routine experience. Content would be similar, but the execution would suffer IMO. In short, it'd suck the joy out of my commercial shoots, especially when working with lighting.
Not everything is critical commercial ... I also shoot candid stuff on location using the Leica S kit ... I did a beach shoot with the Sony but brought the S with a couple lenses for some shots ... like this handheld one of my pal taking a break from the activity: S(006), S-180 3.5 CS using the focal plane shutter.