Yes, I had the EF-70-200 Mark II. The size is the major difference to me. I am yet to pixel peek with the RF lens yet but the pixel peepers say it is at least as good or even better than the EF version. The past week I focused more on the auto-focus system, while it is good, it is not as fast as the RF 24-70. The price is another factor, but for me, I just prefer not to use an adapter. The only EF lenses I kept are the TS-E-24 and 100 Macro and that is because there are no RF versions yet.
Thanks for your reply, I appreciate it! I currently have the 28-70 f/2 (I almost never used the widest end of my EF 24-70, so I knew I wouldn't miss it) and am interested in getting the 70-200 for that extra reach. I'm also considering getting the 24-105 for a lighter travel option as well as more video-based work, although so far I've not found the weight of the 28-70 to be too much of an issue (it makes up for it's bulk by allowing me to leave other lenses at home).
And I'm in the same boat as you with the 100mm macro. I can't wait for an RF equivalent to come out.