All depends on if that IS is going to get you shots you wouldn't get otherwise.
I had a
70-200L for several years and upgraded to the IS when I was tasked with
shooting
an indoor party. The 70-200L IS worked great down to 60/sec at 200mm, and
considerably increased the sharpness of my soccer shots, especially when paired
with a teleconverter. It works well with both 1.4x and 2x. It was worth it to
me.
-- Rich
-------------- Original message ---------------
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
***********************************************************
