200 f/2.8L II vs. 70-200 F2.8L IS II

Has anyone here done any comparison between the prime 200 F/2.8L II and the 70-200 F/2.8L IS II? I own quite a few primes like the 35, Sigma 50 HSM, 135l F2 and like them all, now thinking about to get the 200 F2.8L II for hiking, don't really want to haul the 70-200 2.8 IS out there while I am doing those 25+ mile day hike or those extended backpacking trips, and because of that I feel like I am missing some opportunities when a telephoto lens is needed, I always carry just the super wide to mid-telephoto range such as 14-24G, 24-70G, or 10-22, 17-40, 24-70L...depending on where I am going and what camera I carry, just wondering how the 200 prime compare to the new MK2 zoom at 200mm. of course I will loss the IS on the prime but I am mainly interested to know the pure optic performance between the two.

Thanks.