I just ordered the 70-200 f/4L IS from B&H for $1025. I went through the same tough decision as many of you have and purchased it base on IQ and portability. All my other lenses are 2.8 and usually cary a total of 3 in my bag while traveling. Money was not a factor and total carrying weight of my equipment was the biggest. For the type of photography that I do, mostly scenic and outdoors with enough light, f/2.8's is not an absolute necessity. My friend has the f/4 non-IS hooked up to his 10d, hand-held, and he had plenty of tack-sharp images. In good light, you're getting 1/1000 sec shutter speed and that is plenty to get good clean images. I know that the bokeh will not be as nice, but I am planning on getting the 135mm f/2L and the 85mm f/1.2L II at some point for portraits. These lenses hold their value so much that if and when I need f/2.8 IS, I can easily sell it on craigslist with minimal loss. I don't care about bragging rights. This is simply a hobby and the only bragging anyone should care about is the picture itself. You can have the sharpest and most expensive lens in the world, but if you take crappy pictures you'll look like a fool with money to burn.