I have the 24 PC-E; with the 14–24/2.8, it is my workhorse for architecture.
I am a DAP subscriber, so am familiar with Lloyd's work. I very seriously considered changing gear base (again!) when I read his review of the 17 TS-E: independent tilt and shift axes on a lens that is extremely sharp with all aberrations well controlled. A dream lens for me. The first thing I did with my new PC-E was change the tilt axis orientation to be coincident with the shift axis, and I use that combination for well over half the interiors I shoot.
For my 45–50 and 80–90 equivalents, I am considering the Mirex plus Hasselblad lens on Nikon F combination. I can't justify spending three times as much for the 45 and 85 PC-Es, as much as I would like them.
I agree that the lock knobs are too small, and am considering having these modified.
I agree 100% with Graham's comments re. gear ratio on the tilt axis—you really have to wonder if there is a single photographer on Nikon's design staff: on the 24, I cannot think of a single instance where I have used more than 2 degrees tilt; different for table top work with the 45, of course. If I were designing these three lenses, they would have three different gear ratios on the tilt axis AND these axes would work like the Canon's do.
Re. CA: I have noticed a touch (1-2 pixels around v. bright light sources) but easily controlled. None would be better, of course! Cheers to all.