I don't normally like higher-contrast lenses like Zeiss, BUT have owned the 35/2, 50/2, 100/2 - sold all and now just own the 135/2 APO.
Love the 135 - all the superlatives you read are true.
The 35/2 - - sharp, nice color, etc, no objectionable CA
The 50/2 was very nice, but I was using a Leica 60 Macro w/adapter for a % of the cost and had too many 50-60mm lenses, so sold it. Also not hard to find very nice 50mm glass out there.
The 100/2 is very sharp with nice bokeh, but CA control is not great at all.
Voigtlander 90/3.5 and 180/4 APOs also exceptional, but not great at handling veiling flare (SLII better than SLI). Also run some Mamiya 645 glass with adapters for personal work that I love and will never sell. Unreal bang/buck and great look. Also - another vote for the 28/2.8 AiS. Never should have sold that lens.
For what/how I shoot, of the ZEISS glass I used to own, only one I would consider re-acquiring would be the 35. In future, maybe the 21 and 15m
Edit 1: Forgot - cameras in question are D800e and D3S.
Edit 2 : on Nikkor side, lenses I use primarily and love are the 50/1.8G and 85/1.4G - with 24/1.4G on way. The 105/2 DC is very nice once dialed-in but with some CA at wider apps. The 200/2 VR lives up to it's rep, but a beast in terms of handling (Nikkor designers should look at Leica 180/2 APO for how to make a chubby easy handling). The 14-24 I never took to - focus shft and too much flare due to front element. The 70-200/2.8 II G - also not a fave and sold - not really a big zoom fan, so biased that way, and I'd prefer to shoot the 85G or 135 Zeiss anyway.
The 800e is tough on glass, so it is very much a experimentation process until you find the right mix you like that can match or exceed what the camera can deliver - depending of course what end goal is. Sharpness isn't everything all the time.