It is about pixels being sharp. If you look at an image at actual pixels the pixels should look sharp, that is sensor resolution would limit sharpness and not the lens. An OLP filtered image would be slightly fuzzy, but would respond well to sharpening.
Here are some images I got from Tim Parkin with different sharpening. Just to make clear, all these images were processed by me, using LR 4.3. I used my standard sharpening EKRNES which uses deconvolution at a small radius and another setting I call Tim Parkin which is a bit wider radius, higher amount and halo supression.
D800 - no sharpening
D800 - EKRNES (LR, 45,0.7,100, 17, 20)
D800 - TimParkin (LR, 100, 1, 0, 0)
The images below are from Tim's test image with the same sharpening settings as above
This is your image as from camera JPEG (which also has some sharpening)
And this is your image with my sharpening
You may note that the unsharpened IQ180 image is a bit soft, this depends on the pixels being small so the lens transfers little contrast at the pixel level. The higher the resolution the worse the pixels look. But the IQ180 has a lot of pixels.
I hope I have Tim's permission to use the images. He permitted me to use them in this article:http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/71-mf-digital-myths-or-facts
Tim Parkin is the editor of On Landscape: http://www.onlandscape.co.uk/
If you want different samples, there is another one on my flickr account...
Why do you dismiss the sample from the D800 as "not typical", but accept a sample from a 7 years old Hasselblad camera with a resolution too low to be offered today? "Typical" for an Hasselblad would be a H4D-50...