Dont know what to do - lens quandary

So - Over the last year (with the exeption of my lovely 70-200 2.8L II) I have used maybe 90% prime lenses, specifically the Sigma 50mm, 85mm and a tiny bit of 150mm macro.

My trusty 24-105L and 17-40mm has largly gone unused. Something tells me selling them would be a silly idea, but...I would also like to buy a nice wide prime and not having the funds at hand Im looking to sell something!

I would like to buy something around the 24mm to 30mm range - and it has to be f1.4-f1.8 (Im a big fan of bokeh)

So, it really leaves me with one choice (unless anyone can offer another alternative) of the Canon 24mmL 1.4. Now, if I was to sell both my 24-105L and 17-40Lmm I could afford it.

Does anyone think its a stupid idea, has anyone here sold there zooms for a prime, and understanding my current lens line up (50/80/150/70-200) would it be a silly idea!!??

Im still sitting on the fence, the only thing really stopping me is the idea of selling two lenses that can do so much for one lens that does a lot less....But on the flip side, iv hardly used those lenses....AHHHH!

for starters, aperture does not equal bokeh. Bokeh is the quality of out of focus areas of an image. I'm sure you are referring to shallow DOF.

What camera body are you using? For a crop, there is the Sigma 30 f/1.4. Canon has a 28 f/1.8 as well as 35 f/2 and the 35 f/1.4L.

I'm in a similar position. My 24-105 doesn't see much action and I'm tempted to sell it to make better use of the money effectively tied up in it. But I know I'd regret it. So I continue to save for a 50mm. I don't think I'd be happy selling my 24-105 and getting a 17-50 and a 50 f/1.4. I couldn't afford a 24-70 and I don't know that I'd use it that much more. Though 1 stop does sometimes make the difference indoors in the afternoon. But I've frequently used the 70-105 range when I have the 24-105 mounted, so I'm not sure the 24-70 would satisfy me either...