Canon 90D vs 6D Mark II Decision (owning L-series EF lenses)

[ree28278]

I have been going around in circles trying to decide whether to purchase the 90D or 6D Mark II.  I am looking to replace my 60D.  Most of my shooting is sporting events (horse shows) both outdoors and indoors without flash.  Indoors is challenging because of low-light situations.  I never used the 60D for video, and used an iPhone 13pro instead.  I am conflicted with the 90D shooting 90% of photos and 10% of video (instead of the iPhone), or the 6D?  

These lenses I have in the order that I use them are:

EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM

EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM

EF 70-200 f/4 L IS USM

Any help will be appreciated.  I have read reviews and YouTube videos of comparisons, but wanted to ask here.  The 6D would probably match up better with the lenses I have, but the 90D has newer technology.

Thanks.

[ebiggs1]

"I support the suggestion to rent ..."

John normally a wealth of photography info and I part on renting low cost gear. It is a good idea on a lens for instance that cost $10,000 and you are going to use once or twice. Not such a good idea on a sub $1000 refurb 90D camera. Even a new one isn't a good rental idea either. Especially on a camera you are going to use all the time.

Although the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens is a way better lens than what you have it is still slow even slightly slower than yours. Which really doesn't matter until you get in low light stuff if that is still a big concern. Just to get the extra 100mm you get a nearly $2500 price tag. A better choice would be one of the 150-600mm super zooms. On a 90D a 150-600mm zoom has the equivalent of nearly 1000mm of FL and buddy boy that is some serious focal length.

The correct answer remains the 90D and the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM Art Lens (if money allows).