Apologies in advance to anyone here in the analog forum who might be offended, but since OP is asking about film scanning techniques as part of his analog interest in his Hasselblad thread it seems appropriate to supply a quick primer response here (which he can later pursue in more detail in the hybrid, scanning and/or digital forums).
KatFan, if you aren't going to do your own BW printing, and are more interested in seeing/using your Haselblad images (esp color) on a TV or computer screen, you'll need a good scanning setup. The difficulty there is medium format scanning drops you into another giant can of squirmy conflicting worms: everybody has a different idea of acceptable "scan quality" and preferred method of achieving it. Also, making good scans is like photography itself: there is a learning curve where you'll need to pick up new skills (and if you shoot a lot of pics, getting bogged down in scanning can become a tedious chore).
The "best" scans are typically made with dedicated film scanners like Nikon CS8000 or 9000, Minolta MultiPro II, Polaroid SprintScan 120 (aka Microtek Artixscan 120) or various Imacon/Hasselblad FlexTight units. These are all long discontinued (aside from one or two hideously expensive Hasselblads): you'd need to buy one second hand. The Minolta was arguably the best but was also the rarest: finding an operational example today is nearly impossible. The Polaroid/MicroTek was more common but you don't see them around much anymore: they were popular for BW negative scans but lacked the hardware dust/scratch removal features popular for color work. The Imacon/Hasselblads were fastest, but handling can be tricky, they have wear points that require occasional parts/servicing, and they tend to be very pricey unless you opt for an early model with antiquated connections like SCSI.
That leaves the two Nikons: these are probably the most popular, available and widely-sought medium format scanners. They have modern FireWire connections, hardware dust/scratch removal for color films, and extremely durable LED light source. OTOH, they have quirks galore: mechanically fragile, the circuit board with FireWire socket is fragile and can short out easily, Nikon software is unsupported beyond Mac OS 10.6 or Windows 7 (there are workarounds), the 120 film trays are fussy to load, very thin depth-of-field almost requires using the optional glass tray which costs a bloody fortune, the 8000 model can be much slower in use than the 9000, and they generate a loud whining noise that will make your dog, cat and spouse flee the premises. Nikon will no longer repair them: while there are some very helpful DIY repair tutorials on various forums, disassembling and servicing these boxes is not a trivial undertaking. Pricing jumps a little higher with each passing year, as examples that don't need repairs become scarcer and scarcer (figure minimum cost at $2495 for the CS9000, $1495 for the CS8000).
Extremely popular alternatives to the Nikons are the Epson flatbeds with film scanning optimization features. Top of the line include the V700, V750, V800 and V850 (all very similar, differing mostly in global marketing and software bundles, price ranges from $1100 brand new to $250 used depending on model/condition). Operated with care, these can produce very nice medium format film scans, esp of BW negatives. Third party upgrades are available from companies like Better Scanning who offer adjustable film holders and wet scanning kits. Epson also sells more affordable, somewhat less high-end models like V600 for approx $250 brand new which can produce decent results if used very carefully. No consumer flatbed can quite equal something like a Nikon or Hasselblad dedicated film scanner for absolute printable resolution, but they can certainly be more than good enough for screen viewing (and printing, if expectations are moderate).
"Camera scanning" with a digital camera. macro lens and copystand is a rapidly trending method of digitizing film. The actual "scanning" is as fast as snapping the shutter button. However, there are surprisingly few commercial solutions available: you generally need to cobble together and jury rig your own combination of copystand, film holder and light source. This may involve a lot of time-consuming trial and error, esp for medium format film vs the smaller 35mm film strips. Results can rival dedicated film scanners in resolution, but color management can be difficult and there is no automated hardware dust/scratch removal.
Larger cities and towns with many photography enthusiasts often have rental facilities where you can rent a room with complete turnkey scanning system by the hour. This can be very efficient, allowing access to premium hardware without huge upfront costs or taking up space in your home. Its also a good way to dabble in scanning to see if the hybrid workflow suits you at all before making a large investment. If you find the scanning process too difficult or tedious, that discovery should make you feel more certain and secure in a decision to go full analog or full digital instead.
You seem familiar with the full analog workflow, so I'll just touch on the Hasselblad digibacks for a moment. The nicer, most current, most convenient versions like Hasselblad CF-V-50cII still cost upwards of $9K new but if you're willing to compromise on somewhat lower resolution and ISO that tops out at 200-400 an older second-hand back from Phase One or Leaf can be had for $1200-$3500 depending on features. Cheapest require tethering to a laptop to view/evaluate/save files, more money gets you fully portable self-contained operation with a rudimentary LCD screen on the back and internal file saving to CF card. Coupled with a lens like the 120mm Makro Planar and extension tubes, the digital back could also be used to "camera scan" your film work.