CANON EF 70-200MM F 4.0 L USM or IS USM ?

[David]

EDIT : THE HEADING IS WRONG... I AM INQUIRING ABOUT THE 2.8 VERSION OF THE 70-200MM , NOT THE 4.0 VERSION.

I have been looking at the 2.8 70-200mm lens options and discovered that there is several hundred dollars difference in the price of the IS v non IS versions (not to mention the new II version of the IS model which is much more expensive again).

I have found a 2.8 USM version in the US for 980.00 US which compares favourably to the roughly 1,700 you would pay for one in Australia so I am tempted to buy it but I am wondering what people think about the IS v the non IS versions..is it worth the wait to collect enough money to buy the IS version or go with the non IS version. Context questions below:

What body am I running it off ? the 50D with 1.6 crop.

What do I already have in 2.8 range ? None: What do I have in IS Lenses ? 24-105mm IS USM 4.0; and other lenses in the 70-200mm range ? a 100-400mm L 4.0.

What photography do I do most ? Landscapes> Why look for new lenses then, you already have gr8 landscape lenses with those and your 10-22mm Canon ? Well sooner rather than later I am widening my genres to nature and wildlife photography and portrait photography.

For general walk around without tripod stuff I use the 24-105mm with the IS giving me roughly 2 stops of advantage but at times the limited focal length and 4.0 is too short or too slow so I am thinking the 2.8 70 -200mm will be longer and faster than both of my current L lenses in that range.

The logical question then is how often do I shoot in low light conditions ? Rarely except when I am deep in a rainforest and want to shoot wiildlife moving about in there under the canopy of a deep shaded area....that is where I come unstuck with my current gear.

Naive me is thinking that the 50D could handle a bump in ISO up 2 stops and that would help combined with the 2.8 speed to overcome any 'disadvantage' from NOT having an IS version...so I think ok, well its going to be rare and you can cover the loss in other ways.

But now I am thinking of moving human subjects indoors and NOT using a flash but how often do you want to do unplanned happy snaps of family/friends at parties anyway and if you are doing serious portrait work a couple of flashes and lighting tricks would overcome any non IS loss of performance in that context too.

Think I have convinced myself in my circumstances I can do without the IS version and go with the one I have found on Ebay.

Footnote: I am aiming to get a 100mm 2.8 lens in the near future as well.

Thoughts.. suggestions welcome