It's more a matter of illusion vs reality.
Sharpness has more to do with processing than optics for the size of images allowed here. It is no challenge to put up a 1MP image that is sharp on a web page, even with a basic lens, and even if focus is slightly off. Take any image here from someone, downsample to a sharp 1MP, then upsample to 20 to 50MP, and stick it on their HD, and they will delete it immediately when they see it at 100% or even 50%.
Now, if you're showing a 100% crop and tell us what sensor was used, then we might tell if the lens is sharp or not.
I don't know why this has to keep being repeated. One of the first things a person should learn IMO, being a digital photographer, is how processing affects results.
In that case there is no way for you to determine anything here, since we all do edit our work, which we know will be compressed by the site when we post. I think Medicineman and I are aware of what we are bringing to the table. I've seen his shots in the field, he's seen mine--maybe we are a mutual admiration society. But I don't have any doubts that a DO lens can produce sharp images if proper technique is used. All the information is included in my shots, you just have to read the strip of info at the top of the image. These are from the same image. One is uncropped, the other is a tiny slice of the overall image. And this is not just the 400mm DO on the 5DIII, it's with a 2x TC III. Big file, so I had to reduce it 70 percent. The section of skin does look funny, but if you are a jigsaw fan you can find where it came from. Oh, yeah--I was too close to this elephant for comfort.