Also my personal dream 5-lens kit from Zeiss would probably be:
I think the 15mm, 25mm f/2, 50mm f/2 and 100mm are the most amazing of the ZE line, and of course those are the ones excluded from the kit.
The 21mm is also amazing, originally I thought it was perfection but I think that was I was only comparing it to the 16-35mm, and at f/2.8 there is a massive difference between the two. But next to the 24mm f/1.4 it didn't wow me quite as much.
The 35mm f/2 is also stellar and I'd say sharper than the 35mm f/1.4 (but the 35 has better bokeh). The 35mm f/1.4 is also ridiculously heavy though and almost 2x the price of the 35mm f/2.
The 50mm f/2 is much sharper on the edges than the 50mm f/1.4, and even wide open at f/2 the 50mm Makro is sharper than the 50mm f/1.4 @ f/2. But that's not to say the 50mm f/1.4 isn't a good lens, especially considering it's low price. I'll tell you this, (before I used the 50 f/2) I used the 50mm f/1.4 and was pretty blown away by it compared to the 50L I had been using.
The only ZE lens that didn't "wow' me from the get-go was the 85mm f/1.4. Maybe it's because the 85LII is my normal 85mm, and that's tough to beat. Not to say it's not a good, or even great lens, I just wasn't that impressed with it compared to it's Canon counterpart.
ZE 100mm is incredible, probably the sharpest lens I own. But it's $1850, compared to Canon's $950ish 100L Macro, only for half the price you also get IS and AF. Not sure if it's worth the price difference in this case, but I don't miss the Canon 100L. If I was shooting stills I'd go w/the Canon.
Sorry for the long response, I took my medicine late today so even though it's "veg out and surf the web time" my thoughts are still racing.