A couple of thoughts to stir the pot.
I shot frames down to f16. I think the comparison frames were at f11 (at least the ones I based my conclusions on on-screen). The focus-plane issue was present in the entire series. I agree that two-to-three stops down is the right place to shoot. Unfortunately, difraction really does start to kick in visibly not long thereafter.
The 45mm test was the Phase 45mm versus the Pentax 45-85mm zoom. I don't own the fixed 45mm
The 75mm Pentax lens cost me $175. Seriously. That said, I know that the "list" prices on the Pentax gear will be more along the lines of its competitors when they return to our shores. This isn't a price-for-quality issue. That might be true with the Leica S lenses, but they're a whole other kettle of fish.
The 50mm 'lux at f8 is no better than my more modest (and pre-dropped) 50mm 'cron, nor frankly a 50mm CV. By f8, the 50mm CV f1.5 I tested was really a fine lens. I might just throw my f1.1 on the M9 and re-shoot this for kicks when I play with the S2 later this week.
I agree that the Leica is inconvenient for many applications - which is why people turn to the Canon and similar 35mm systems.
And lastly, you're right, it wasn't a fair test. I should have averted to the fine-print in Canon's EF lens brochure, where they clearly state: "The EF 24-105 is not suitable for photography of highly textured subjects. Under near-ideal conditions this lens is limited to producing a fraction of the resolution of which the Canon 1-series cameras are capable. By purchasing this lens at a list price of over $1,000, users agree to and accept the terms of Canon's "Inferior But Nonetheless "L" designated Lenses Policy" found at Appendix "B" to this brochure".