Even though my Zeiss 2/135 is a superior optic in terms of sharpness and minimized CA, I have always held the Canon 135L in the highest regard. AFAIK only the 200 f/2L has a more sublime bokeh and there is just something oh-so-special about the rendering. So, I am thinking about switching things up there - would certainly be easier to use for portraits.
Jocau will chime in to remind me of my Zeiss 135mm history, which is a solid point of course, but my counter is: a. the 135L has been on my wishlist for years and year, b. the lighter weight and AF means I will actually use it a lot more. I'll always keep my Otus - love that thing, but I think I'm ready to let it stand as my only Zeiss lens.
No solid plans, just thinking at this point...but I might order one in from B&H and see what I think. I can always return it, but it would give me a chance to use it side-by-side with the Zeiss and I can keep what I like better.
It's good enough for Elena Shumilova, so probably good enough for me...
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/AHR6xc 200f2 with 1.4xIII on a A7Rii - it works by Paul O'Neil, on Flickr
It is obviously a FL thing, but according the slrgear.com, the Canon 135L at F4 is sharper than the Otus 55 at F4. This is not speaking to all the other very important qualities that make a lens a good lens - but it is a good sharp lens - dated but good.
In terms of the 200F2, it feels huge and clunky and loud by comparison - it is an indoor hockey lens in my opinion - and the Sony is not quit ready for that duty yet. I tired and it just doesn't work for fast sports.