Certainly the German soldier was superior to the Russian soldier. The German soldier of WW II has to be considered one of the best in history (just looking at what they managed to pull off makes this clear).
However the T-34 clearly trumps every other tank in the war. The combination of good mobility, good armor, good firepower, and ease of production put it ahead of everything else. The T-34 introduced sloped armor, which was a huge advance in tanks.
The Tiger, while a deadly tank, was extremely expensive to build and had lots of reliability problems. The Panther was actually a superior tank because it learned from the T-34 and increased the mobility and armor protection (by adding sloped armor). It also, however, suffered from the same problems of reliability and expense.
The German quest for the ultra weapon very clearly cost them in terms of the ability to actually field a decent quantity of weapons.
Compare the production numbers of tanks in WW II (I’ll include the US, even though their mainstay tank, the M4, was lousy by comparison):
Germany
Panzer III 16311 (obsolete by the end of the war)
Panzer IV 13311
Panzer V (Panther)6557
Panzer VI (Tiger) 1368
Panzer VII (Tiger II) 569
USSR
T-34 34780
T-34-85 22559
USA
M3 6258
M4 33403
M4(76) 10883
(also another 13k or so tank destroyers)
As the above numbers indicate, the Germans had too many different types of tanks, and never really produced enough of them. The much vaunted Tigers were a small drop in the bucket of overall production. Panzer 4s remained their mainstay tanks until the end of the war, and they were clearly inferior tanks to the T-34. They were not really much better than a Sherman.
I left the British out because their tank production exhibited most of the failures of the German method and produced even fewer, worse tanks.
Not the seven T-34s my father told me he personally destroyed, the only time he ever spoke about his time on the Russian front. Destroyed by one GERMAN foot soldier in one day.