Trading 2 primes to fund for 70-200mm mk2?

Right now do have a sigma 30mm but am not satisfied with the center sharpness of the lens..will the 35L performs better?

Not much. Read this...
http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/30v35_2nd

I would keep what you have and get a 1.4tc. If you really are not happy with the Sigma, sell it for a 35L.

You may have a good reason for doing this, but for me, I wouldn't sell the 135mm 2.0 to raise $ for the new zoom. The 135mm is an outstanding piece of glass. Outdoor portraits are beautiful with the 135mm even on a crop camera, and the fast 2.0 gives you all kinds of low light options. The 70-200mm 2.8 II can't do what the 135mm 2.0 can do. Personally. I would buy a used 200mm 2.8 L for about $650 to add to my arsenal, and forget about the heavy expensive new zoom.

Noobic wrote in post #10061325
Right now do have a sigma 30mm but am not satisfied with the center sharpness of the lens..will the 35L performs better?

Ask POTN member Ronnie here -> "bsaber" - as he's recently made the 35L and 50L part of his lens set which he uses for pro' photography! And he's someone you can trust.

I trade my 100L for this lens.
Definetly worth it!

I'm always considering giving up my 200 f/2.8 and 85 f/1.8 (and adding a lot of money) to get the new 70-200, but the weight and bulk factor holds me back.

OP could save a bundle and try to snag a good 70-200 f/2.8 L IS MK1. The MKII for a premium gets you less sample variation and exchange headaches. A good version of MK1 is similar to MKII.

Savas K wrote in post #10063019
OP could save a bundle and try to snag a good 70-200 f/2.8 L IS MK1. The MKII for a premium gets you less sample variation and exchange headaches. A good version of MK1 is similar to MKII.

uhm NO it is NOT.

I'm not sure why everyone is dogging the mk1....i have it and shoot wide open all the time and its sharp.

Cheever wrote in post #10064932
I'm not sure why everyone is dogging the mk1....i have it and shoot wide open all the time and its sharp.

YEah I too have the MKI and at 2.8 I can see the peach fuss on the subject's ear when I zoom in on my RAW in DPP...what the heck more would I want.???
I paid it $1600 USD new in the box, person bought one as backup, never used it. LOL

JayStar86 wrote in post #10060341
hell yah, that new 70-200 F2.8 IS is THAT good IMHO.

THAT good is only relevant if the focal range and aperture is what you need. The 70-200 cannot shoot at 30mm 1.4 now can it?