Sell 100L and 100-400mm for 70-200 II?

I love my 100L and 100-400mm. But I've been lusting after the 70-200mm F2.8 IS II. I bought the 100L as a replacement for my 60mm macro when I bought a 5D. I love the 100L for macro (which I don't do much of), but I don't like it as much as I thought I would for portraits or as a walk around lens. My 100-400mm is great as well, but I think I'd be just as happy with the 70-200mm and teleconverters. I use the 100-400mm mostly for airshows, the zoo, and wildlife.

Most of my shooting is of our 20 month old daughter at the park, the gardens, etc. I have also been considering starting a business shooting kids portraits. Do you think that I will be happy with the 70-200 II? How much will I miss the 100L and 100-400mm? I would eventually buy another copy of the 60mm to do some macro stuff. I really miss how compact and light it is. It worked great as a walk around too.

Thanks for any advice. I love this forum as a place to bounce ideas around. Even if it's the same ideas over and over sometimes.

I feel your pain

Keep both lenses; get a 2nd job JUST for another 6 months and buy this beauty later.

As much as I love my 100-400 I traded it for a 400 5.6 plus cash my way in order to buy a MKII and so far I am not feeling the pain although I don't have the 70-200 yet. But I am very excited to get another yes I said another LOL I had one and thought it was one of the best i have ever used. But if you need reach? I never tried a TC on the 70-200 but I hear it's great

Why not consider looking at the MK1 version of the 70-200? It is about $300-$400 cheaper than the MK2 and was considered to be a workhorse professional lens and one of Canons best. I know the MK2 is meant to be technically better, but the MK1 is certainly no slouch.

I definitely have considered the Mark I. I'm not sure why I was never real excited by the Mark I. I owned a 70-200mm F4 IS for a while before I had a 5D. I enjoyed it, but on crop it was too long for an always on portrait lens and too short for wildlife. At the time I never considered the 2.8. But now that I hear people saying they won't need their 135L anymore, they are selling their 85L now, I'm thinking that this new version is really something special. And I can wait a bit to save $300-$400 more. On the other hand, I wonder if I should just get a 70-200mm F4 non-IS for portraits and keep what I have.

Jumpcut wrote in post #11111020
Why not consider looking at the MK1 version of the 70-200? It is about $300-$400 cheaper than the MK2 and was considered to be a workhorse professional lens and one of Canons best. I know the MK2 is meant to be technically better, but the MK1 is certainly no slouch.

Because for 400 you get a lens that kicks it @ss

Yeah, that too.

Get a 70-200 II and a 500D closeup filter. With extenders on the 70-200, it can get really darn close.

Didn't your sig say you were 15 yesterday? Birthday?

Have you tried the 500D/extenders on the 70-200mm? I had a 500D for my Canon 50mm 1.4 and I did not like it at all. You lose infinity focus. Maybe it would be better than buying another 60mm.