Without taking money into account, which of these lenses would you choose?
As of this moment, I am a stronger believer in shooting only prime lenses (I own 35L.85L.135L), however, I'm tempted to get a zoom for Weddings, Events, and Travelling.
In the past, I've encountered some venues with VERY poor lighting and set up as a result of poor organizers without much consideration of the photography. At these instances, I find myself shooting a lot at f2 for consistency reasons with high high ISOs (ISO 6400 - 10000 on 5D3) or I find myself missing moments because I lack the room to move about.
This really bugs me and I feel a flash coupled with one the two aforementioned 2 lenses will able to solve my problems. I understand the merits of having a f2.8 over a f4 lens in low light IF theres no flash involved, however, if we factor one in, how much does it the f2.8 really help? My other photographer friend is telling me 2.8 because of the low light capabilities, but like i said before, I don't feel this applies to me because A) I have f1.2-1.4 primes for when SHTF and B) I personally find there are marginal benefits for low light when a flash is involved. The 24-105 in my case APPEARS to be the ideal choice because its more compact, has IS (dreams of trying out cinematography later on), and a longer range.
What do you more seasoned photographers think about this? Are there factors I have forgotten to take into account?
Also, how much better is the glass on 24-70? (Yes this bugs me