Well, it's not really $700, since you're comparing the price of a used one to a new one. I paid ~$1200 for my (new) IS version a few years ago, and sold my non IS for $950, so for me, it was $250. YMMV
Tom P. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Mike Thomas > Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 10:09 AM > To: 'Canon Eos' > Subject: EOS To IS or not to IS? > > Greetings All, > > I have been a member of this list for about 5 > minutes....literally. Anyway, I would like to ask the age old > question (sorry if it's been over done) if opting for the > image stabilization feature on the 70-200L is worth and extra > $700. I am looking at "like new", non IS 70-200 L's on Ebay > for $900 so I am having a difficult time justifying such a > high price tag for the IS. Let's face it $700 is a nice chunk > of $ towards another lens! Suggestions and feedback would be > greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance. > > > -Mike * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
