cookie99 wrote in post #16643326
If you buy the 135 f/2 L you will never part with it, it is Canon's fastest lens and sharpest just ask the pros not the weekend experts.
The 135 is a fast lens, but it is not Canon's "fastest". They have plenty of primes that are faster than f/2.
If you were referring to focus speed, then Canon still has plenty of lenses that are the same speed AF or faster.
As far as it being the sharpest, I wouldn't say this either. Take the 85L and stop it down to f/2 and then compare. The 70-200 2.8 II is also VERY sharp wide open and competes with plenty of primes which is great considering it's a zoom.
To the OP, between the 2, I would personally go with a 70-200 2.8 II. It is an AMAZING lens for portrait work, and I have even seen some great landscapes done with it. It is quite a bit more versatile than the 135mm lens, but it is a lot heavier. Having a white lens also tends to make you stand out. For some this is a bad thing, for some it's a good thing, and others don't care either way.
The difference between f/2 and f/2.8 is 1 stop which is not huge, but there are times it cane make a difference. The quality of the out-of-focus areas between the two lenses are very similar. Personally, I cannot tell the two apart from each other.
The 70-200 2.8 II is sharper than the 135L when compared both wide open. The 135L is pretty soft in the corners at f/2. When stopped down to 2.8 the 135L begins to have an edge. It has less vignetting and begins to match the sharpness of the 70-200 2.8 II.
So when it comes down to it, you need to consider the size, weight, and size of the area you will be working.
For me, I didn't mind the weight, or the fact the lens is a white color. I LOVE have the 70-134 and 136-200 compared to just have 135mm. For me, the 70-200 2.8 is a go to portrait lens.
Just my 2¢
5D Mark III / 70-200 2.8L IS II / 24-105L / 50 1.8 stm / Tamron 70-300 VC / Sigma 85mm 1.4 Art