About to pull the trigger on a 7d body as I need the speed for football and baseball games.
Good cam for this but be aware of the not-so-nice ISO performance.
I have access to a 70-200 2.8 IS for this which is great,
If sport is your primary area of interest you will probably want to upgrade to a 300 soon. The new 120-300 from Sigma would be an option, 'cause colleagues say it's optically close to the old 70-200/2.8; just the AF is a bit slower.
I need some suggestions on what I should get for my daily lens.
Canon 24-105 f/4L IS
From my personal experience a very nice bread-and-butter lens. Sturdy with [depending on the specific sample of this lens] good to pretty-nice image quality. On the short end it's a bit long when used with a 1.6 crop (field of view 38mm) but the crop gives it quite a bit more reach on the long end, which from my experience is many times nice to have.
The f4 might be a bit slow, but it's not too bad unless you work a lot under low-light conditions without the ability to add flash. In regards to your implicit question about low light, 2.8 and a 50mm I would say that most of the time you will want to have smth faster than 2.8 when working in low light while rather needing a wider lens, especially on crop. Therefor I wouldn't so much aim for a 50/1.4 but rather a Sigma 35/1.4 or a Canon 24/1.4.
Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 DI VC
I bought this lens and while the image quality is really good it drove me crazy that everything works contrary to what Canon implements. Might be a lesser problem when you have only 1 Body and don't change lenses a lot, but it's still smth you should try out [by renting the lens] before you spit out the cash. My lens is looking for a new owner after just a few days of use....
Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8
I never owned or used this lens and while it's certainly an option I wonder if it's worth the money. Especially if you take into account that it's EF-S and therefor useless in case you ever upgrade to APS-H (1DMkIV) or Full Frame.
Canon 24-70 f/4L IS
Have no experience with this lens. But despite the presumably better image quality when compared to the 24-105 I would still choose the latter because of the 105mm vs. 70.Conclusion:
If I were you, I would buy the 24-105. I bought mine in 2006 and it's still working on a daily base despite many harsh working conditions like rain, dust, expeditionary off-road, riots and war. Not all of these lenses offer the same IQ and it was a difficult moment, when I had to return a borrowed 24-105 which, as I found out, was quite a bit sharper than mine.
FWIW, in all these years I had three repairs: First one in early 2012 when it wouldn't zoom correctly, one in the end of 2012 because the lens developed a severe Zoom-creep (from wear) and another one in 2012 when I decided to replace the rubber-sealing on the mount during a C&C because it looked like been attacked by mice...