Help with Lens choice

I am in the market for my first L series Lens. My choices are the 70-200 f2.8L IS and the 28-300 f3.5-5.6L IS. I currently have the Canon 10-22mm, Sigmas EX 35mm f1.4, Canon 17-85 IS kit lens, Canon 100mm Macro and a not so good 28-300mm sigma this new lens will replace. If I choose the 70-200 I'll probably order the Canon 1.4x teleconverter at the same time. I typically shoot landscapes but have been working on candid portraits recently. Any advice from you all would be greatly appreciated.

The 28-300 is big, slow, heavy, expensive, and not terribly sharp. why do you need this? Buy the 70-200. Keep the plastic one for traveling.

Yes, the 70-200 would probably be your best choice.

Alans 20D wrote in post #9305585
=Alan's 20D;9305585]I am in the market for my first L series Lens. My choices are the 70-200 f2.8L IS and the 28-300 f3.5-5.6L IS. I currently have the Canon 10-22mm, Sigmas EX 35mm f1.4, Canon 17-85 IS kit lens, Canon 100mm Macro and a not so good 28-300mm sigma this new lens will replace.

Since you have plenty of other lenses shorter than 70mm, I'd get the 70-200.

The 28-300 is a lens designed to offer a superzoom for the IQ conscious FF (film or digital shooter). In essence, this is a lens for photojournalism.

The 70-200 gives up some of the range on either end (especially the short end) in favor of being much faster (two stops faster over the concurrent range) along with better IQ.

If you're shooting in good light consistently, then the 70-200 F4 is supposedly the sharpest zoom Canon makes. It simply does not receive poor reviews. The 2.8 is for lower light, but how much better can 2.8 possibly be than 4 if you're in a situation with decent light?

I'd go with the 70-200, although I don't know what the weight difference is between the 70-200 2.8 IS and the 28-300 3.5-5.6L is. It seems like the latter would be heavier to carry around all day.

Another vote for the 70-200 here.

+1 on the 70-200mm here. An expensive step up from the kit lens but worth it.