Serious dilema over my next portrait/general lens

So it's come time for me to start saving up for a new lens. I've narrowed it down to 4 competitors

1) 24-105mm f/4 IS or 24-70 f/2.8
2) 135mm f/2
3) 70-200mm f/4 IS

I'm seriously stuck. I shoot mostly portraits/glamour/fash​ion etc. And up until now the 50mm and 85mm have done a pretty solid job of covering my needs. However, I just want more room (focal lengths) to play with. Between the 24-105 and 24-70 it's more of a I'm not sure which one has better IQ. The aperature speed isn't that big of a deal since I have my 2 other primes for low light conditions. This new lens purchase will most likely be used either outdoors during the day or in a studio controlled lighting environment.

I've seen some AMAZING images from the 135mm. My big reservation with that lens though is that i seems like a rather odd and fixed long focal length. I'm not sure how much I would actually use it, especially considering my "studio" is only about 20x12 feet. And then with the 70-200 I feel like I would already have this covered by the 85mm and 135mm (if I got it instead)

So while I'm complaining about fixed and odd focal lengths I do like the appeal of a zoom over a prime. Especially since my trip to Vegas when I had to keep switching out between the 50mm and 85mm..

Anyways.... I'm just a mess. I dont think I really know what I want, I just know I want one of those 4 hahaha.... So yah. I could definitely use some help =)

My vote is #3

You've got two nice studio primes. I'd vote for the 24-70 or a 70-200 variant. Whichever focal length you'd prefer.

for the price of 70-200 IS, couldnt you score a 24-70 2.8 and a 70-200 f4?

the F4 IS IS is about $100 less than the 24-70. The 24-105 and the 135 can be found cheaper

If I were you, with your current set up and shooting mostly portraits, I would get the 24-70 or the 70-200. Probably the 70-200.

Do you think the IQ from the 24-70 edges out over the 24-105?

Well, I'm going against the crowd but, since you say your focus (hehe) is glamour/portraits/fash​ion, I'm going to recommend the 135. As you say, it is an AMAZING lens for that kind of work. Limited, perhaps, but if it suits what you do, and it's not your only lens, I don't see how you can go wrong.

Now, if you were asking about a walk-around lens, I'd agree with the 24-70, but you didn't. And the larger aperture the better for your kind of work, so I'd choose the shorter, faster lens over the 24-105.

Unless you are going to be shooting heads only, in your studio, I would not get the 135. As good a lens as it is, it's not the best choice for small studios.

With that said, if you really want a zoom, I would get the 70-200 or the 24-70, if you see wideangle being used for a different look, then the 24-70. is the choice, imo.

I'm not sure you actually need another lens, for what you are going to use it for,

I have used most of these lenses. I prefer the 24-105 for studio work for 3 reasons. It is a sharp lens, it has great color and contrast, and it has the wide end needed for full body and family shots. I also like the 70-200, but you'll be limited to head and shoulders if you use it.

The 135 is stellar for head shots, but its primary advantage to a portraitist is its phenomenal bokeh. For this you'll be shooting wide open or thereabouts. With that in mind, its a great lens.

I like the 135mm 2.0, but then again I'm crazy about that lens and what it delivers. If space is a problem, the 100mm 2.0 would be a great choice. For portraits, its nice to have something faster than 2.8 when you need it. Choice #3 is a GREAT lens, but f/4 for portraits won't always do.

Wouldn't the 100mm be a little redundant with the 85mm? If i go with a prime over 85mm I'm pretty set on it being the 135mm (unless someone gives me a 200mm f/2 for free)

gibsonla wrote in post #10825671
Wouldn't the 100mm be a little redundant with the 85mm? If i go with a prime over 85mm I'm pretty set on it being the 135mm (unless someone gives me a 200mm f/2 for free)

You're correct. I just didn't notice you had the 85mm 1.8. With that said, I would get the 135mm 2.0. There's no better lens for your outdoor shots. You would soon be taking those "amazing images" yourself with that lens.

I have all those lens. For portrait/general I would say the 24-105L. I love it on the 5D II.

To be fair, I came into this biased towards the 135mm. I'm just having a really tough time justifying the focal length. I'm paranoid that once I buy it I won't really use it since it's so long.

I had a chance to test it on a friends 7D at an indoor basketball game (not my usual type of photography to say the least) and the images it put out where absolutely phenomenal which is what got me interested in it in the first place.