Thank you all for the answers. I might need to add a bit to my lens situation.

I am mostly doing landscape, night and wildlife/macro photos. I am allready waiting my samyang/rokinnon 14mm f/2.8 to arrive. That 16-35 f/2.8 is mainly there to support me with landscape and stuff like that, the rokinnon is going to be my night etc. lens mainly. (also i want the challenge from full manual lens to improve my skills )

Also will be getting the 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro with the 5DSr body together from a nice package.

So what i understand from the discussion, is that the 16-35 is no the most optimal travel lens, and perfectly get it since it really is an wide lens.

Having 24-? still gives me nice enough area to have those landscape pictures on the travels.

24-70 f/2.8 vs f/4 IS now the rivals then. I also take pictures quite much inside buildings aka churches etc. But is the IS my best friend or the 2.8?