A modern 60 megapixel back has 6 um pixels, a 22 megapixel back has 9 um. The difference is not huge, ie you can see much of the lens quality if you pixel peep a 22 megapixel too.
However, with that pixel size you can shoot f/16 without sacrificing any significant in diffraction, f/22 is quite okay too, which allows the analog lenses to work better. When using a 22 megapixel back I consider f/16 to be the "optimal" aperture. Another advantage with f/16 as optimal aperture is that the focusing challenge becomes easier due to the increased depth of field.
If you make informed choices of lenses you can get really sharp image quality with only analog lenses, but there are also lenses that may be a bit disappointing. Generally it's among the wide angles you find the weakest performers so you need to be extra careful there.
As far as I know some of the older digital lenses are actually exactl the same design as the analog counterpart, only with some extra precision checks during mounting.
It also depends on your expectation. If you expect that the corners should be rendered so sharp that you (almost) can't see a difference from the center when you pixel peep then you put pretty tough requirements on the lens. Many analog lenses can actually pull that off, even with some shifting, but far from all.