ejenner wrote in post #17356867
In that case they might as well sell the 70-200 f2.8 for the f4 version. Same difference, so clearly not significant. Cheaper and lighter too. And the OP says for outside, so speed should not be a factor.
But, yea, the OP doesn't give good reasons for getting a 135L IMO either.
to be fair, a 70-200 F2.8 and 135F2 comparison is much different than a 70-200F4 vs 70-200F2.8 comparison. That's 1 stop across the entire range, the 135F2 is one stop at one focal length (though that 1 stop seems pretty dramatic since it's a telephoto stop).
The 70-200F2.8 @200mm F2.8 can give good separation, close to the 135F2. However, if TS is shooting the NON IS version, that's quite a bit of light loss and thus usability on the long end. For outside portraits, yes, the 135 is a winner, I'de take it over the 70-200.
Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC