Sold 16-35 2.8mk1, now what?

I sold me beloved[was] lens of Canon 16-35 2.8L mk1 to my friend, and he bought it with very very good price, i was looking for a bit higher, but honestly i will never find any better price than what he paid already, so now i am into finding its replacement, there are few lenses, 4-5 as wider choices and 2 as narrowed, and i still can't decide even after so long time of debating and conversation and research, either go with majority 90% who favor one lens due to some reasons or go with another choice because it can be afforded or managed to make it works, and i always come here for advices/answers and whatever, so what's now or what's the recommended replacement?

I am kind of in the same situation, I am looking to replace my 16-35mm f/2.8 II.

I am considering the 14mm f/2.8 II or the new Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 IS.

The only thing I don't like about my 16-35 is it's sharpness, it is a very soft lens, otherwise I have zero problems it.

Why are you replacing your 16-35mm??

Dustman wrote in post #17796502
I am kind of in the same situation, I am looking to replace my 16-35mm f/2.8 II.

I am considering the 14mm f/2.8 II or the new Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 IS.

The only thing I don't like about my 16-35 is it's sharpness, it is a very soft lens, otherwise I have zero problems it.

Why are you replacing your 16-35mm??

Tamron is one of those 4 or 2 narrowed lens i put for choice.

I sold mine just to keep on track of newest models, it is soft maybe as i didn't test it much and didn't use it, but if some of those mkII is soft too then definitely mk1 is a soft copy, so i was thinking why not going for newest when it is possible and affordable, i had the lens for 9 years, some even don't wait that long to change and i don't care for those who holds theirs for decades or longer, their own reasons, with me i always upgrade if it is possible and affordable to do.

In fact i was hoping to get this 16-35 mkII as well, but many reviews don't put it as outperforming f4 version or Nikon 14-24, so i took it out of the equation/choice.

It really depends on why you sold your 16-35 f/2.8 and what you're looking to gain in its replacement.

If you just want something sharper, I've been quite happy with the 16-35 f/4 L IS, mostly for landscape work. If that's what you do, and f/4 is okay for you, it's a fine lens.
If you want to do astrophotography then you probably want a faster prime lens, like the 14mm f/2.8, or a 24mm f/1.4.
If 16mm wasn't wide enough for you, then a 14mm prime, or one of the wider zooms... But if your gear list is up to date you already have a Sigma 12-24, so you have ultra-wide angles covered (unless you're unhappy with that lens).

Do you want another zoom, or a prime?

Maybe you want to share your 4 (or 2) narrowed choices, so we know what direction you're thinking?

yellowt2 wrote in post #17796520
It really depends on why you sold your 16-35 f/2.8 and what you're looking to gain in its replacement.

If you just want something sharper, I've been quite happy with the 16-35 f/4 L IS, mostly for landscape work. If that's what you do, and f/4 is okay for you, it's a fine lens.
If you want to do astrophotography then you probably want a faster prime lens, like the 14mm f/2.8, or a 24mm f/1.4.
If 16mm wasn't wide enough for you, then a 14mm prime, or one of the wider zooms... But if your gear list is up to date you already have a Sigma 12-24, so you have ultra-wide angles covered (unless you're unhappy with that lens).

Do you want another zoom, or a prime?

Maybe you want to share your 4 (or 2) narrowed choices, so we know what direction you're thinking?

Let's say, i want a sharper lens even it is not a big main factor, but to have it is just a bonus, and i want wider if possible, but 14-16 is wide enough already, and i do shoot landscapes but i will definitely add astrophotography to my list, so f2.8 could be handy, i can't tell when i really need f2.8 not just only for astrophotography, but many keep swearing about how great of that IS stop on 16-35 f4IS, but IS is something and f2.8 is something else and i can't decide which will be a most valuable factor, i am not dedicated to one type of photography and i like to shoot in many areas of photography.

Also, it is better to mention what lenses i have of UWA side and what my other options:
1. Samyang 14mm f2.8
2. Canon TS-E 17
3. Sigma 12-24 mk1

ignore Canon 10-22 because it is not for full frame and i sent it to death in my bag years ago, will keep it for my daughters one day if they get into photography.

My 4 choices of lenses are:

1. Canon 16-35 F4L IS
2. Tamron SP 15-30
3. Nikon 14-24
4. Either Ziess 15 2.8 or Canon 11-24

I narrowed it to #1&2 for 1 reason: PRICE
I sold my 16-35 2.8mk1 for almost exact price of the first 2 lenses so i narrowed it to those two, i can afford that Nikon in January or the Zeiss/Canon in February next year, the weather now is amazing and until 2-3 months i can't tell if the weather will still be nice or if i will have time to go out much to justify the price of expensive lens.

Last thing to mention is that i want a zoom, so Zeiss is out automatically, and price will put 11-24 and 14-24 out as well unless i wait longer and save more.