My 24-70/4L IS for 17-40/L & 1 more lens

Hello
I maybe will sell my 24-70/4L IS (6 month old) and wondering what you think about this solution:

Sell my 24-70/4L to get a used 17-40/4L and 28-75/2.8.
I fell that 24-70 is not a important range for me and earlier I've owned a Tamron 28-75 and I think it does a good job in that range. After some months back I realize that I use my 24-70/4 for night life shooting (I work as a photographer that photograph night life in a town) so a trade to a 2.8 normal zoom lens can be good. I don't compare these lense to each other cause 24-70 wins in many situations.

Since I sold my 17-40L for a year now I've missed the wide angle focal length <24mm. The 24-70 it's not wide enough for me. I got some 77mm filters left.
I do not only photo landscapes I do photograph some night sky too. And now Samyang 14 comes into this race.

My alternatives are: (after selling my 24-70)
1. Canon 17-40L (Landscape) USED + Samyang 14/2.8 (Night sky & landscape) NEW
2. Canon 17-40L (Landscape) USED + Tamron 28-75/2.8 (Normal situations) USED
3. Tamron 15-30/2.8 VC (Landscape + Night sky) NEW (need to add 400 €)

Which alternative is the best solution you think? The tamron can't take my 77 mm filters (that I use often when I photograph landscapes)

I would be very happy with solution #1. I have the 17-40 and like it very much. For me, 17 is wide enough for me, but I have heard good things about the Sammi.

That's a broad spectrum you are trying to cover with two lenses, but out of your listed options I'd go with #1 because it would cover almost everything you are wanting to do with the exception of night life photography. You seem to place more emphasis on landscapes and night skies though.

Are you using a flash for the indoor night life stuff?

Have you considered adding a faster prime to your options? If you have the funds, what about the following:

17-40L + used 35 f/1.4L or 24L II (both of which are dropping in price big time as of late), or a 35mm f/2.0 IS

The prime would allow you to better shoot your indoor night life gigs and can do night skies, while the 17-40 would perform landscape duty. The Samyang 14mm f/2.8 is technically the better night sky lens, but it may not be as good for the night life shots.

I think I will keep the 24-70. It's not the best night life night sky shooter but it does it pretty well I must say. Yeah, 2.8 is too prefer at this kind of photography but I've been using 17-40 earlier to this kind of photographing and my 24-70 handle coma pretty well. I've two 6d cameras and they handle high iso very good so if I need to shoot 3200 instead of 1600 it's not a big deal.

I think I will add 17-40 or the samyang 14 to my gear list. Earlier I was happy to use the 17-40 + it has 77mm filter like my 24-70. I will be using this for landscape only.

The samyang can do everything that the 17-40 and it's faster. But then it comes to the manual focus and everything. I can handle the manual focus but in night shots it will be harder to do that even if I do that with 24-70. No exit data which I prefer to have. No filter without other solutions (more expensive though). Not as good for my kind as night photographer when it comes to shoot nightlife in the town.

That was my line of thinking as well for the Samyang, that the manual focus would be tough in low light, faster moving situations. If the 24-70 is doing ok for the nightlife club shooting and your normal landscape use, then buying the the Samyang later would add a more unique perspective and better night sky shots than the 17-40.