135L or 2nd body?

if and when the FF bodies come out with the touch screen LCD's and continuous AF in video ... the current models will drop in price. (that's why i didn't get a second FF body yet)

wait + save up.

Just chiming in that I often shoot (belly dance) events with the 135mm f/2L, for example with a solo girl on stage. The 70-200mm is nice, and the f2.8L version is reasonably sharp wide-open, but the IQ and extra stop of light with the 135mm is just really sweet.

One other anecdote. I have used both the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM and the 70-200mm f/4L for these shows. First, the IS doesn't help much with moving dancers, but it does keep the viewfinder from being so jumbly when panning around to track the dancer without a tripod (because tripods are too slow for fast-action dance). But! Easier hand-holding with a unjumbled viewfinder image is possible with both the 70-200mm f/4 and the 135mm f/2L, because they weigh a lot less. And the issue that caused me to even consider using the 135mm f/2L prime over the larger zoom: In show after show, I kept finding that the most often used zoom focal length given working distance was ... 135mm!

Lastly, the 135mm is a fabulous portrait lens, particularly if you want to use natural or window light within interior settings. I like it a lot on a cropped-sensor camera like the 7D, because it has extra punch at 216mm equivalent focal length. This makes for excellent telephoto compression, and it offers undistorted imaging for faces at modest working distances. Also, just a bit less intimidating than holding the 70-200mm f/2.8L in front of the model/bride/groom's face. The 135mm f/2L would have plenty of great application for weddings.