[semi-extrinsic]

IIRC there were some internal setbacks in the process towards digital Hasselblads when they changed owners a few times in the late 90's and early 00's. So it wasn't all stiff-upper-lip.

And when they did go digital, it was slightly ridiculous. I mean, the cheapest option of the H3DII which launched in 2007 had 50% more megapixels than the most expensive Canon or Nikon camera you could buy that year. With almost twice the sensor area of a full-format DSLR the pixel count wasn't for show either. One of those low-end H3DII bodies (without a lens) in OK condition goes for more than $2000 today.

[frostburg]

This is true, but keep in mind that higher-resolution, bigger digital backs (in comparison with fully integrated dslr cameras) were already on the market. Even so, Hasselblad lead that market for a time, then lost ground due to flagging innovation, bad decisions, etc.