Tom,
I said in his forum multiple times that I was VERY happy with the 16-35II of which I owned 2 versions over the years. IMHO by far the best WA zoom available, definitely better than all the Nikon WA zooms (which I owned and shot extensively as well). I actually do not understand why there are so many complaints about that lens.
Peter
Peter,
it is allways hard to find out which lenses work or dont work for someone.
I had lenses which worked good for me and others said they were medicore.
And the other way around.
In the end the 24-70 fitted my bill also regarding the range. If I had a strong need going wider I wouldnt hesistate to give the 16-35II a try.
I also have to say that I now judge lenses more on the overall look they create (color, contrast, "pop") than searchig the corners at 100%.
In this regard the 50/1.2 seems to give me a special IQ quite often.
Overall there are very few reports from persons disliking the new 24-70, while there are all kinds of reports about the 16-35/2.8.
What I have to say that I find the range and speed of that wide angle zoom very usefull. The 14-24 Nikon in comparison, while being a great lens, I found to wide for my taste.
Here is a recent shot from the 24-70 at the wide end. Sorry for posting it in 2 threads: