The reason is a bit of a jumble but...
1) I've been in MF for a while now and very few of the shots I have taken have made it into my personal 'hall of fame' of shots I really like.
2) My fine art print sales in limited editions have taken off and are at much higher prices than before, and it really doesn't matter to the buyers what they were shot on. 5dII, M9, Ricoh GRD, whatever...
3) MF is such a hassle. I hate LCCs and all that. If there was reliable, zoomable, daylight live view with no LCCs I'd be more excited. Even then, I sigh when I hoik the bag up onto my shoulder and schlep off into the field with all that stuff. It weighs down my body and my mind and it makes my work too formal. I personally am passionately anti the traditional MF landscape look (graduated sky, foreground interest, lead in lines, blah blah blah) and increasingly favour a more fluid and purposely less 'technical' look.
4) I have too much gear and it's getting in the way of my photography. I really mean Waaaay too much gear.
Hmmmm..
Tim, thank you for your answer - all your points make sense of course, and except nr. 3 and partially nr. 2 they are all very personal to you and what your imagine-creating process is, so let me just play the devil's advocate for nr. 2 and 3.
Nr. 2: first of all, CONGRATS! I am very happy for you, well deserved. More into the point though, while is true that no customer really care about the gear you used, I am pretty sure that they all care about your images' IQ - so if you don't mind, I am very interested in a couple of more detailed points here, of course if you were willing to share this with us: first, what is the largest size you print your images at? Second, what kind of gear allows you to both feel free in your image-creating while at the same time providing you with the IQ you and your customers need? Or to put it differently, what gear are you instinctively reaching out to first when you go out?
Nr. 3: Agreed on the first part, I am pretty sure nobody loves LCC and we all would do without if at all possible - however, once you created your profiles for the different lenses that need them, it is a pretty straightforward process, just one more step in the digital workflow; as much as I don't like to hassle with them, to me personally LCC use wouldn't be enough of a reason to give up to the IQ that a tech cam with the P65+ and Rodenstock/Schneider lenses provides.
Gear size and weight, of course that is a major concern; while the Phase kit is definitely too big and heavy, a tech camera with 3 lenses and a back is way smaller and comparable in size & weight to a DSLR, or even lighter. It is not comparable of course to a compact camera, or to a m4/3-based or M9-based system, so am I right in assuming that these are the solutions you are thinking about to replace MF?
The last part of your Nr. 3 point is in fact the most interesting for me under a philosophical point of view, however IMO it is very difficult for me to define it as a "traditional MF landscape look": I'd rather describe it more generally as a "traditional landscape look", having seen it done by everyone with any kind of equipment. To me, what using a tech cam (or MF) does is forcing one to spend more time for each frame, more so for a tech cam of course; this is not related to achieving a particular look, 'cause obviously you can spend more time searching for all kinds of composition and looks: I'd see it more related to a spontaneous approach to shooting versus a more analytical one, if that makes sense, and of course here personal preferences and shooting styles are all that count.
Looking forward to hearing from you on the above, and thanks again for sharing your thoughts