As to the matter of 14-24mm f2.8, have you considered the lighter 12-24mm f4 ( if you only want nikon lenses ). It is certainly wider and great for your DX sensor ( counting in the crop factor ) , and takes 77mm filters.
Ryan
Yup, agree with giantcanopy (bro, i am not stalking your thread hor.;p)
14-24 f2.8 is kinda a heavy investment. There are also people who do not like the wide perspective as they are not use to it. My friend is one of them. I suggest you try first before you get a Pro Lens for it.
I would personally suggest you to try out 3rd party lenses. I used to have this thinking that ONLY Nikon Lense can perform well. But this is not the case, especially for DX lenses. I got the Tokina 12-24 purely to try out the range and i can tell you i :heart: it. There are many good landscape shooters here that uses 3rd party lenses like the Sigma 10-20mm.
Not only that, 14-24 f2.8 cannot fit any filters for the time being. This greatly deprived you of trying out shots with filters like GND and CPL.
As for 17-55, i've got a friend who bought the Tamron 17-50 first, then upgraded to it. He don't like the weight and he feel there is not much difference. End up, he sold the Nikon 17-55 and settled for the Tamron 17-50 again. And again, 17-55 f2.8 is another heavy investment, considering it is a DX lens. I would suggest 24-70 f2.8 instead if you really want a FF lens.
All and all, it is subjective. You decide.