Really? Why? The 16-35 II can do everything the 17-40 can but better, with the obvious exception of the 35-40 range. But that's when I plug on the 24-105.
This is kind of a good point. I have the 24-105. So would I really be adding much by getting the 17-40 or would I benefit much more with the 16-35 2.8? So many questions!!!!!!
F2.8 has its place. Plus, that extra little 1mm of the 16-35 helps as well. Is it worth twice the price of the 17-40? For me it is. I would love to try the Canon 14mm F2.8, but talk about expensive. :cry