I know this should be an easy decision, but my female, 51 yo, 5'3" frame is wanting the smaller, lighter, less expensive f4 to be an acceptable compromise. I am upgrading lenses this year and just ordered a 100mm macro f2.8l is. I also want a 135 f2. Any comments on the zooms? My bf is pushing me to get the best lenses, since we've already invested in multiple 5d bodies. Any suggestions and input appreciated. I do understand the 2.8 ii is great, just worried that it's too much for me to pack for a full day wedding.
At my wedding, the photographers were two lightly built 20-something women. I think between them they were shooting with a 70-200mm f/2.8, a 16-35mm f/2.8 and a 24-70mm f/2.8. At least for the posed shots, the 70-200mm f/2.8 was on a tripod, so
(a) they were only lugging around 3 lenses between the two of them, (one of which was a 70-200mm f/2.
(b) for the most part, they weren't handholding it (never during the posed shots, though they may have been for the candids)
It meant also that at any given time the two photographers were getting substantially different shots.
So speaking to your situation if you're shooting as a two person team, and you are looking to economise on weight, having two of those bulky 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses (if I read you correctly he already has one) seems like a poor choice (I don't see what having a 70-200mm f/4 would add if he already has the 70-200mm f/2.8 either). So I'd say skip it (maybe get a 135L instead if the two of you need to take tele shots at the same time)
Or were you thinking of a scenario where you're shooting alone ?