Upload & Sell: Off
This does not look too great.
I checked DxO cores of all lenses vs. FE35 (and FE55) and seems they did better than any Canon or Nikon lens [except 200/2, 300/2.8, 400/2.8], part of the result is camera of course. They didn't even went to purple, only lenses like Zeiss 2/135, Nikon 200/2, etc. did. So I'm not exactly sure what is the issue. Look for example comparison Canon 35L vs FE35, Canon barely gets to blue in dead center, definitely no purple...
Also based on real shooting I would say that FE35 doesn't suffer from lack of resolution, or even uneven distribution of resolution. There are really many bigger issues like color casts, than resolution - due to which I prefer to shoot FE35 with A7 over added resolution of A7r.
It matters because it's $800.
I'm considering if the $300 C/Y Zeiss 35mm f2.8 could possibly be better. Sure, no AF but maybe not so bad.
I guess if you look at Roger's numbers, it does seem to match up. It seems like no 35mm lenses have great corners on FF.
I doubt Distagon T* 2.8/35 would have better resolution, or more even field - please check the MTF. But C/Y version has pretty nice rendering style, and I think I would prefer it's boke over FE35's.