Hi Kari,

Welcome to the forum!

These are complex questions and there is not single correct answer. Fortunately, there is also not necessarily a "wrong" answer either. These are all good lenses capable to taking excellent photographs. My typically recommendation is to "shoot to need." In other words, start with a lens and then use it until you develop a definite need (by the way, I sometimes do not follow my own advice ).

A few comments, and as I am not familiar with your experiences, please forgive if all of this is simply stating the obvious:
  • 16-35 mm is considered "ultra wide angle." As such, it is typically regarded as a "niche" lens. If it was your only lens, all your subjects may seem very small and far away, unless you can get very close, at which point you may have issues with distortion.
  • 24-70 mm (or 24-105) are much more typical "general purpose" focal lengths. If asked, I suspect many people would state that the lens they own in this focal length range is their "most often" used lens.
  • The 24-70 II is a bit sharper than the 24-105 f/4. As you are getting the 5Dsr, you may appreciate this additional sharpness. But, both are very good lenses.
  • The 24-105 f/4 is significantly less expensive, at least if you buy used, as it is often available for ~$600. So, you are paying a good amount for a bit more sharpness and f/2.8. If you are unsure, you may want to buy the 24-105 f/4 IS used, and then sell it if you decide to upgrade.


My typical travel kit for the 5DIII is:
  • Rokinon 14 mm f/2.8
  • EF 24-70 II
  • EF 70-200 II


For traveling, the 24-70 II is, by far, my most used lens. So, I would encourage you to start with either the 24-70 II, 24-105 f/4 or the 24-70 f/4 IS. But I find the other two lenses (14 f/2.8 and 70-200 II) very useful.

Unless you really enjoy the UWA perspective, and if this is primarily for travel, the second focal length range I would recommend is actually not UWA, but a telephoto lens including:
  • 70-300 f/4-5.6 L IS. Small(ish), light(ish), good general purpose telephoto lens.
  • 70-200 f/2.8 II Heavier, bigger, but gives you f/2.8 and is probably my favorite lens. Takes the 2x TC well, so you can get to 400 mm if needed. I would go this route if you want f/2.8 for low light or depth of field reasons.
  • 100-400 II. This if you primarily want the extra reach of 400 mm. It is excellent from 100-400, but if you do not want 400 mm, then the 70-300 L is smaller/lighter/less expensive and the 70-200 II gives you f/2.8.


There are some other great lenses in the telephoto range (70-200 f/4 IS, for example). But those are the three I would consider for travel.

If you do want the UWA perspective, the 16-35 f/4 IS is considered sharper than the 16-35 f/2.8 II. So, if you want sharpness, go 16-35 f/4 IS, if you want f/2.8 then that lens.

For what it is worth, I have marveled at some simple travel kits. One member on the forum traveled the world with the Rokinon 14 mm f/2.8, EF 35 f/1.4 L (the Mk II is now available) and the 70-200 f/2.8 II. Very capable kit, covers a wide focal length range with good, fast glass. You can see his work here. My point being, buy some good capable and flexible equipment, and the rest is up to you.

Good luck,
Brant