That all makes sense - changing for the sake of changing is rarely a good idea, but for me I wanted to reduce packed size and weight, while maintaining zoom range and IQ for hiking this fall. It was 7 days of back country camping with all food, camping gear and camera gear on my back - I thought that was a good incentive to look at options. In the end I decided not to make the switch (other than a tripod change) because it was just so much money to make a meaningful difference in weight, but my upgrade path is mostly laid out for when time comes to make a slower change.I feel the same way. I suspect Canon believes we’re in the majority, which is why they designed the RF 70-200 zooms this way.
I don’t plan on a ‘complete overhaul’. Where RF lenses offer a significant advantage, I’ll swap as I swapped EF 70-200/2.8 IS II for the RF version. The 24-70/2.8 adds IS, that’s worth it to me. The 100L Macro adds 1.4x mag that I don’t need (I have the MP-E 65) and adds focus shift that I don’t want, so I’ll keep the EF 100L. Still on the fence about the 14-35, but leaning toward keeping the 16-35/4 IS.
5DIV switch to R5
EF 16-35 f/4 and Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 switch to just RF 15-35 f/2.8
EF 24-70 f/2.8Lii stays in the bag with a converter
EF 70-200 f/2.8Lii switch to RF 70-200 f/4 (f/2.8 is unnecessary for me on these hikes)
Manfrotto 055cxpro4 with XPRO ball head switch for FLM CP30-S4 II with a RRS BH40
All in that was going to save me 4.2 lbs (or 28% of my previous kit weight), reduce packed size by a fair but, cut one lens out, while maintaining a very comparable zoom range, and maintaining or improving IQ. The issue was it was going to cost over $9K CAD. Piecemeal change it is!