135mm 20L IS lens

I'm sure the price would of a 135 would easily double if IS was added. I just bought my 135 last month and after shooting with it there's no way I would give it up. IF I needed IS I would bring my tripod along or invest in a sturdy monopod (at a fraction of the cost) instead of paying the huge price tag that Canon would ask for a 135 f/2L IS. Case and point, look at the 70-200 f/4; the non-IS version is about 1/2 the price of the IS version.

But who knows. The rumored Sigma 135 f/2 OS ( http://www.canonwatch.​com …os-coming-photokina-2014/ ) may force Canon's hand into a 135 with IS. Like Scott though, I doubt I'd buy one.

One of the joys of the 135L is the bang for the buck.
You get a Mini 200mm f/2L IS for about $900.00. that is a bargain!

Then, you get to carry it around without breaking a sweat or attracting any attention.

I must admit that I've come to the point when even at 135mm the IS would be beneficial.

Thankfully, the 5D3 high ISO quality comes to the rescue.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #16807565
One of the joys of the 135L is the bang for the buck.
You get a Mini 200mm f/2L IS for about $900.00. that is a bargain!

Then, you get to carry it around without breaking a sweat or attracting any attention.

Exactly! I love the 135 and use it all the time in low light hand-held. I wouldn't want to pay what I'm guessing would be double the price for a new version with IS. It's perfect as-is.