My favorite lens is my 70-200 f4 IS. I really want that 2.8! In January I should have enough cash to make this happen so I am looking for your opinion.
I really like the pictures I see from the 135L too.
I have been wanting both for a while now. Its hard to make up my mind.
The 70-200 gets used mostly for candid portraits of family and kids. I also shoot sports with it (kids sports). Other shooting I like to do is usually done with my 17-40 for landscapes or cityscape. I use the 85 1.8 for indoor low light shooting - of my kids and family, but if its not too dark, the 70-200 stays on the camera most of the time.
I love the shallow depth. Would 135 at f2 or 200 at f2.8 give me a shallower depth of field? Also, in your opinion, which is more desirable bokeh?
So Im considering trading in the f4 70-200 for the mark 2 or keeping my 70-200 and adding a 135L. Thoughts?
Some might look at my gear list and see that I don't have a standard zoom. eh.. I don't even miss it.
I went 70-200/2.8L IS mk I (actually borrowed a friend's copy for about nine months --- he found it too heavy) to a 70-200/4L (hated the lack of IS) to a 70-200/4L IS (bliss) to a 70-200/2.8L mk II (awesome improvement over the mk I). I plan on buy a 135L next year (unless there's reports of flying pigs striking planes and the 100-400L or 14-24L gets announced).
For sports and low light stuff, I would prefer the 70-200/2.8L IS mk II over the 135L. More flexibility and the IS does come in handy, including certain panning and tripod shots. Weight and size issues aside, the only thing the 135L has over the 70-200 is better bokeh.
Whatever you decide to do, do not sell the 70-200/4L IS. It is not worth selling it to finance a 70-200/2.8L IS II. Better to wait six months or so longer to save up the difference. I've been in so many situations where the 70-200/2.8L IS II was just a little to big/heavy to fit comfortably in a crowded camera bag where the slightly smaller and lighter 70-200/4L IS would have been perfect.
The 135L is an old design and is fairly cheap to rent. I've rented it for $43/week at the local borrowlens. So I would definitely recommend renting one first. If you get hooked on 135L portrait photography, that could be the answer right there.