Lens itch (another 24-105 or 24-70 dilemma)

Hi! Just a bit of a background, I'm a hobbyist and started with photography in 2008. I currently have a Canon 7D. I'm into portraiture and some events. I mainly use a 50mm 1.4, 24-105 f4 or the 70-200 f2.8 IS. I'm itching for the 24-70 f2.8 though that would mean I will have to let go of my 24-105 which is also my primary walkaround lens. My dilemma is, is it worth the change? Is it worth the loss of the extra focal length specially on a walkaround lens? Thanks in advance!

The extra stop of light on the 24-70 and the extra 35mm on the long end for the 24-105 are basically what you have to weigh for yourself. Do your normal shooting habits require more light instead of reach, or vice versa?

What would the 24/70 do for you that the 24/105 does not,only you can decide.
Personally I would find the 24/70 a bit heavy and restricted in length as a walk about lens,not for nothing is it called 'the brick'.

I have the 7d and 24-70. Chose it over the 105 because the 24-105 has WAY uglier bokeh. I suppose it comes down to whether you shoot on the mfd end or the infinity end of the focus wheel.

This argument has been extensively discussed in dozens of threads. Search the forums

They really are two different animals. The best choice would really be to add the 70 and see what you end up using more. At that point you can know that you are making the best decision when you sell the other. I actually wouldn't mind adding the 105 to my lineup for its weight and size but I do love bokeh and that's what made me go for the 70

ive had the 24-70, and after selling it to just walkaround with a prime, i just ordered the 24-105 for a trip to disney and as a general walkaround. my logic is versatility during the day, and at night if it under performs, i can always reach for my fast prime @ 1.4 :P

to me, the reach and range > the extra stop of F2.8.

same way i couldnt grab the 17-55, couldnt justify it being so short..... would rather have the extra zoom.

It's really tough =/.. I already have buyers for my 24-105 but I still can't decide if I should let it go in favor of the 24-70. If only the 24-105 is 2.8 or if the 24-70 has IS.

I don't regret buying the 24-70. There was never a contest between it and the 24-105 for me. 2.8 is such a nice creative aperture to have on a zoom when there is little available light.

which is why the 24-70 is a better lens for studio work, portraits...etc. While the 24-105 is better suited for walkaround outdoors. As a landscape/wildlife shooter, I would not consider the 24-70. If I were doing portraits, I think I would want the 85.

17-55 for me. I've owned all three simultaneously for three years and the 17-55 was the one I always grabbed. It gave me an extra stop of speed over the 24-105, and the stabilizer that the 24-70 didn't. Over the years, the 24-70 just never got used so I sold it last year. It was my least favourite of the three. Here's a thread that discusses all of them.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=484061

The difference in IQ is so minimal IMO it comes down to range difference, and of course that 2.8 - 4 aperture, which is why I use primes @ night, and wanted more range during the day... And if I really really wanted that super bokeh I can't get with F4, then a 50mm 1.4 will get it way better than the 2.8 on the 24-70. Which I've owned btw...

My $0.02

What do I know, this is my hobby for fun!