Canon 24-105L or 40D

Guy is selling this lens brand new. It came with his 5D Mark II kit and I guess he doesn't need it. I'm offering $950 but wondering if I should spend the money ( $600-$700) on a used 40D first.
I am currently shooting with a Rebel XT. What are your thoughts guys??

What kind of pictures do you focus on. I'm more leaning towards upgrading your body first. I know usually it's getting great lenses first, but stepping up to the 40D would probably be best. Then I would concentrate on getting new glass.

depends on the glass you have currently.

you could have the sickest baddest body ever made. your pics aren't going to be worth jack if you don't have good glass.

SPEND MONEY ON GLASS!

Some of my best shots are with an XTi and bangin lenses vs. the Mark 3 with ok lenses

I shoot wakeboarding, obviously, snowboarding and mostly landscape. This would be my walk around lens but I also think it would be great for wakeboarding.
I currently have the prime 50, 17-40L, and the 75-300II -->( to be upgraded to a white lens next).

the 17-40 is my walk around lens now

If you already have a 17-40L spend the $950 on a good used 70-200 f-4 IS.

24-105 is a great lens. I have no complaints with mine.

Randy, Do you recommend the 70-200 F4 over the 70-200 f2.8?

BJ, you will get good arguments both ways. I shot with both before I bought the 4.0 and both were tack sharp, for me it came down to what was going to be my primary use for the lens and it was shooting wake in mostly good light. The 2.8 is a very nice lens but extremely heavy to lug around all day, it's a beast. Cost was also a big factor in my decision. Shoot with both if you can and compare, that worked for me.

I agree with Randy on the decision between the F4 and 2.8. If you get a chance to try both out then I'd do so first. I have the 2.8, but I do wedding work too, so I have to have this due to low light at times. If my main focus was wake though then I'd probably just go with the F4. Either way you won't go wrong, but could save yourself some money to invest into something else.

Thanks guys, my main use would be for wake but I would also like to shoot some high school football (night games of course). Would the F4 work for that as well?

I'm not sure if there is a local place that I can try them but will check around.

For football I'd use the 2.8. I have the 70-200 2.8 IS and agree with everything here 100%. If I am shooting boarding in the middle of the day I could just as well be using the F4 since I am not shooting at lower than F4 anyway. But, I was shooting right at dusk a few weeks ago and had issues. It would have been tough with the F4 I think. I may have been able to crank the ISO up to 3200 and used the F4 version though.

bj, check out borrowlenses.com. they'll mail you your rental lens. (transit time doesn't count as rental time) their prices are pretty competitive, as well.

Thanks to everyone for their feedback on the 2.8 vs the 4.

2.8 for football for sure. I have the crank the ISO up pretty high too. Good luck on your decision.