17-40F4 or 24-105F4IS for London

The last time I was in London, I used a 28-200 Tamron Adaptall zoom on my Minolta film camera. It has been many years. I was not happy with the results.
I do recall a few times when 28 was not wide enough.
On full frame, which lens would you recommend for a trip to London and why? I am undecided between the 17-40 and the 24-105. I will bring a fast prime for indoors photos. I am mainly interrested in the architecture and street scenes for London and touristy outlying areas, like Bath, etc. I am also undecided about the fast prime to take. I am leaning towards the 35F2IS, but considering the Canon 50F1.4. I wouldn't want to carry more than 2 lenses, and weight is a consideration. Please, no recommendations wanted for a 70-200 or a telephoto.
I am tempted by the 17-40, especially because it is more compact and lighter than the 24-105L. Do you really like having the wider focal lengths of a superwide in a city like London?

I have both of these lenses, and the 17-40 is always on my Canon 6D. It's sharp, light, and wide. Perfect for narrow London streets. I also have the 35F2IS which is very sharp, and light. I have not encountered any situation where the f2 wasn't sufficient. I think these two lenses will serve you well on your trip. My kit, now, is the 17-40, 35F2IS, and 70-200 f4IS. Perfect for what I shoot. Enjoy yourself. London is a wonderful city.