50 1.4 & 70-200 f4 or 135L

I Have a 85 1.8, 35 1.4 & 24-105. Looking to build my aresenal a little more. Had a 50 1.8 a while back but didnt use it much bc i hated the build quility. Took pretty decent pics when i did though. Also had a 70-200 for some time, but needed to find things to shoot. (Kinda miss it) Loved the IQ. So here I am, with some extra cash. Looking to either get a 50 1.4 & 70-200 f4 or the 135L. Seems people love the 135.

Hmm, seeing you are already quite well set up with primes, a 50mm and 135mm would be a logical next choise. I would possibly substitute the Canon 50/1.4 with Sigma 50/1.4, because it overall beats the Canon in image quality (rendering, bokeh, contrast, bokeh and out of focus highlights, things you appreciate the most on a 50mm lens). If you don't mind manual focusing and you are willing to throw in a little more $$$/€€€, consider also the Zeiss 50mm f/2 MP (amazing IQ, colors just pop out!), or a vintage Carl Zeiss Planar T* 50mm f/1.7. They easily beat the Canon in IQ...

The 135L is a magical lens for it's price, it has perhaps the best price / perfomance ratio of all Canon L-lenses. Another option, which I would do, is wait little longer to autumn as Sigma should be releasing a new 135mm f/1.8 lens with VC. A brand new sharp 135mm (f/1.8) with VC would be awesome combination . 135L is still a great lens and love it, but I would like to see a updated 135mm. For example, updated sharpness (e.g. compared to the new Zeiss APO 135mm, blows the Canon out of the water), and a rounded 9-Blade Diaphragm --> better bokeh. Hopefully Sigma can address these things. However, price is purely speculation at this point...

On the other hand, you have to ask yourself what are you shooting mostly? 70-200 zoom has amazing versality, amazing IQ and sharpness, but f/4 can be sometimes a limiting factor.

What types of photography do you primarily shoot, or want to shoot with the new lens? That could make a pretty big difference.

Without it, I would answer with the 70-200F4, as it's the most versatile of the bunch.

The 135 extends your focal length 30mm with very wide aperture.

The 70-200 extends your focal length up to 95mm.

The 50/1.4 has horrible AF build quality. Search on it and broken AF. I gave up on fixing mine after it broke the 2nd time. I'd go with a Sigma 50mm or some other lens.

get a 70-200 2.8 (non IS) the IQ will rival the 135. I never even use my 135 to be honest.

My 70-200 f4L pretty much sees zero use since getting the 135. The 135 is generally my walk around lens. Unless you feel you need to fill a gap, I'd say get the 135, and start saving pennies for the 50L. Though the 50 1.4 build quality is on par with the 85 1.8, the AF system just isn't internal so it's more susceptible to damage if not properly cared for; only you know how hard you are on your gear.