So if you were me, would you sell the 70-200 is ii and replace it with the f4 is version? It just seems hard for me to justify owning both lenses. One is great for weddings, the other for travel. Maybe there is a reason to own both, but man, what a bitter pill to swallow.
The only reason I like the 135L is because it has the capability to do what none of my other lenses can, namely shoot at f2 at 135mm. But the lack of image stabilization at such a long focal length is kind of a bummer.
The quest for great glass in a lightweight kit is really tough. Just for fun, I weighed the holy trinity of L primes and its only a little bit less weight than the zooms. Like a 1 pound difference. That surprised me. L primes aren't lightweight.
Maybe I'll keep the 70-200 is ii and 24-70 2.8 ii for event photography and use the 16-35, 50 and (fill in the blank) for travel. It just seems like such a waste to leave the 24-70 2.8 ii and 70-200 is ii behind. That's $$$ just sitting at home collecting dust when I'm not "working." It'd be nice to bring my best gear along for the trips.