For me, the sharpest lenses I have, in approximate order. (although frankly, there is nothing between the top 3)
90mm T/S
300mm f2/8
50mm f1.4
Then:
100mm f2.8 macro
70-200 f2.8
Then the rest, including a 24-105 f4, and 16-35 f2.8.
I find the 24-105 soft comparitivley to the above, and the 16-35 is crap in comparison (its pretty good, just not in comparrison).
I still want a nice sharp wide angle. I own the 24mm T/S, and it is good, but not great. (not compared with the 90 T/S anyway).
The other thing is, don't shoot over f10 if possible. With the pixel pitch of the mkIII, any smaller and your are loosing resolution (and therefore percieved sharpness/acutance etc when viewing at 100%) due to diffraction. Diffraction starts seriously affecting resolution after this. It may not be noticeable depending on the subject, but it IS there. (pretty much a fact of physics). All of the first 3 lenses are definatly sharp enough in themselves, to be diffraction limited. at f16, things start going mushy, and f22, I reckon halved the effective resolution, if not worse.
I have done a bunch of research and some testing on this recently, to maximise the capture resolution of my 1dsMkIII for my work. (I shoot mainly landscapes). This has nothing to do with print size etc, but is purely about capturing the best resolution for each shot.
I am confident of capturing, with good technique (Tripod, MLU, etc etc), Sharp, max resolution (i.e. high detail) images with the first 3 lenses on a 1dsMk III at f9-f10.
These are my results, YMMV, and I may very well be using some terms incorrectly.
Mark.