Quote Originally Posted by panopticon View Post
As to my general shooting style, I'd say 50-60% landscapes, 50-40% people, and maybe 5% wildlife (tele-kinda-stuff). Well that doesnt quite add up to 100%, but I hope it gives some indication anyway
If landscapes are 60% of your work and you are serious about landscapes I don’t think the 16-35 II really compares.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=480&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API= 4&LensComp=412&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp =2&APIComp=0

If your serious and want the best for landscape you should be comparing the Zeiss 21mm distagon and the TSE 24mm F/3.5L II Tilt Shift as well as the 24mm F/1.4L II.

Here is another thought, and really if I look back on how I acquired my lenses and how my kit came about. As most people do I bought zooms that gave me coverage. I added primes for the things I love to do. I started with Macro, then later the super telephotos and then landscape. Primes are specialty tools that are exceptional at what they do and can do jobs other than their specialty well. Acquire your first primes around what you really love to take pictures of, in other areas accept lesser lenses for coverage.