Nice to see post-sharpening (PS) being embraced as a viable tool when comparing camera performance, Andrew. As long as no artifacts are surfaced, PS can do a much better job than in-camera methods. By turning off/down in camera sharpening there could also be an advantage in effective noise reduction and edge preservation due to the way DCT quantization works.
While the 5D3 can indeed produce sufficiently sharp images with PS, if the shots aren't perfectly focused with sharp lenses, especially for medium to wide shots, PS can't bring the shot up to a sufficiently sharp level and looks soft compared to other cameras (noise grain can help, but only for brief clips). The 5D2 is a 1.4-1.5K camera (aliasing improves perceived resolution without post-sharpening) and the 5D3 is a 1.6K camera at best with PS: not much room for error and not sufficient for wide shots with far-away objects.
From both a technical and cost standpoint, there's no reason in 2013 for camera manufacturers to not be able to deliver full, true, 1000+ h & v sampling resolution 1920x1080 video cameras with little or no aliasing (oversampled at least 2x in hardware along with a sufficient OLPF). 10-16-bit HDR delivered with H.264/H.265 should be the next product differentiator.