Thanks, great topic.
I have the 10-22 EF-S and yes, its time to get the EF equivalent as I move up to FF. Makes no sense to have a wide on a crop if you got a FF.
Mixed reviews on the Canon 16-35. I can cover the top half of that with the apparently very excellent and new 24-70 II.
But for everything under 20mm .... maybe primes are the answer? I think most of my wide shooting is at crop 10 or 12, and rarely in the middle.
Primes under 20mm are very expensive, more expensive than the 16-35L II. The 20mm gets poorer reviews than the 16-35L II, and the 14mm and 17mm TS/E are much more expensive than the 16-35L. The 17mm TS/E also has a max aperture of f/4 and is manual focus. The 16-35L II takes filters in the front while all L primes wider than 24mm can't due to their protruding front elements.
I'd rather Canon redesign the existing 16-35L II rather than trying to match Nikon's range of 14-24mm. The overlap of 24-35mm is great because it results in a lot fewer lens changes and is more useful indoors, and Canon has more patents to work with in the 16-35 range. Plus I can't see them killing off the 14mm.