I read a lot about Zeiss and special characteristics. Wanted to see for myself and compared my five zoom lenses in a table top setup and started writing an article about what I have found.
as a former Minolta/Sony user I occasionally follow some contributions (in German forums) about Sony and Zeiss lenses and as far as user reports go you've picked exactly the 2 weakest Zeiss lenses available. Especially with regard to corner performance and CAs. Please note: I didn't use these lenses personally so I can only refer to these user reports.
However, amongst other lenses I owned the ZA 1.8/135 and the ZA 1.4/85 and also Minotla G lenses (1.4/35G, 1.3/85G and 2.8/70-200 G) for my Minolta/Sony system back then (used on an APS-C camera, though).
Today I use Contax 645 (digital) with the following lenses: 3.5/35, 2.8/45 (sold), 3.5/55, 2.0/80, 4.0/120 Macro, 2.8/140, 4.5/45-90 Vario.
My observations: as to the Minolta/Sony lenses the Minolta G lenses showed a wonderfull Bokeh, but they did not look as sharp as the Zeiss lenses. The Zeiss lenses have been very sharp in the focus plane and there is a kind of "sudden" falloff to the OOF areas. It's a nice falloff, however the sharp image areas somehow popped out. The Minolta/Sony G lenses have a very smooth falloff from sharp (in focus) areas to OOF areas. Maybe the Minolta/Sony G-lenses resolve as good as the Zeiss ZA lenses... but you won't perceive the same "pop" and therefore you may think they are less sharp. To be honest, back then, I somehow preferred the Minolta G look (especially that of the 35G) - I've rarley seen such a smooth falloff and I assume it is a unique character of the G lenses.
As to the 645 lenses I own they all show a similar look (more or less). In focus areas somehow pop out (in a pleasant way... if you like that look) ... even when the lens is stopped down. But there is one exception: the Vario Zoom. It has a completely different look. It's optimized to reduce flare and although it is a very, very sharp lens (also sharp corner to corner at 55mm, 70mm and 80mm ... at least on my crop 1.1 DB) it simply looks different to all my other Zeiss lenses: it doesn't show this kind of contrasty popping out in focus areas.
So - based on my personal experience - I think it's absolutely impossible to talk about "Zeissness" based on images made by 2 zoom lenses ... above all 2 zoom lenses, that obviously suffer from serious CAs and weak corner performance.
In addition I think your test shot isn't really sufficient to show the look of any lens. You should shoot something with much more room around the subject in focus and also in a less flat light. Or, even better, shoot something "nice" and worthwile to really dive into the image and explore the look of the lens.
Just to make this clear: I couldn't care less about certain myths of Zeiss (or Leica or whatever) glass. I only talk about lenses I've used in the past or that I am using today. I don't know if there is a typical "Zeiss" look. But I know that the primes I've listed above do have "a" certain look that the zoom doesn't show.