300 f/2.8: Non-IS or IS? HELP!!

So I am saving for the 300mm f/2.8 lens, and I am torn between IS and Non-IS. I found a SUPER clean Non-IS version that I can purchase now. Or should I wait to get a used IS version? I am SO CONFUSED!!!

Here's where I'm at:

I don't mind not having IS as I will always be using a monopod with it. I can purchase it now. Lens has some dust, but I'm sure it's a non-issue. BUT... I'm nervous about Canon not supporting the lens anymore, and what I would do if it fails for some reason. And not sure how soon I will have enough for a good used IS version, but I don't want to regret getting the Non-IS if I'm going to lose something (besides IS, of course) if not waiting for the IS.

Got all that? Just not sure what to do, so looking for opinions/comments.

Thanks all!!!

I have one question for you: Is money an issue? If not, get the IS version. Simply because I know that when I had the 70-200 non IS version, I hated it for it’s lack of IS. It’s really hard to get a sharp photo with a telephoto without IS.

iluxa007 wrote in post #14376345
I have one question for you: Is money an issue? If not, get the IS version. Simply because I know that when I had the 70-200 non IS version, I hated it for it’s lack of IS. It’s really hard to get a sharp photo with a telephoto without IS.

Money is sort-of an issue. I do have enough for the Non-IS, not sure how long it will take to save for the IS, and I could use the 300 on some shoots this month. I'm just very afraid of regretting not waiting, but then again, not too concerned about Non-IS.

ARRGGHHH!!!

iluxa007 wrote in post #14376345
I have one question for you: Is money an issue? If not, get the IS version. Simply because I know that when I had the 70-200 non IS version, I hated it for it’s lack of IS. It’s really hard to get a sharp photo with a telephoto without IS.

I don't find this to be true. I've never had a problem getting a razor sharp completely focused portrait or otherwise with my non-IS L telephoto. Especially if you add flash to the mix, wow, just wow but even without they come out well. Fast shutter speed helps tremendously too.

I say you try it out and see if you can really live without the IS.

kenjancef wrote in post #14376370
Money is sort-of an issue. I do have enough for the Non-IS, not sure how long it will take to save for the IS, and I could use the 300 on some shoots this month. I'm just very afraid of regretting not waiting, but then again, not too concerned about Non-IS.

ARRGGHHH!!!

Get the non-IS for your upcoming shoots. If you find you don't like it, you an always resell it to fund back into your savings for you IS. But like I said in another response I have NEVER had an issue with the non-IS. I'm actually thrilled I saved that extra fat chunk of money for something else.

shawncorson wrote in post #14376416
Get the non-IS for your upcoming shoots. If you find you don't like it, you an always resell it to fund back into your savings for you IS. But like I said in another response I have NEVER had an issue with the non-IS. I'm actually thrilled I saved that extra fat chunk of money for something else.

I have a 70-200 Mark II, and I usually have IS off, typically because I use it for sports and mostly always have fast shutter speeds. I will be on a monopod anyway. Just making sure I won't miss out on anything by not waiting. And, as you said, I could always resell it if not happy.

May just go for it...

The biggest issue here is serviceability. Canon no longer services the non-IS version of the 300 f2.8. This means that you are on your own if you ever have AF issues, crack an element, get moisture or dust in the lens, etc.
Not to mention the resale value of something that cannot be serviced by the manufacturer will take a huge hit.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #14376491
The biggest issue here is serviceability. Canon no longer services the non-IS version of the 300 f2.8. This means that you are on your own if you ever have AF issues, crack an element, get moisture or dust in the lens, etc.
Not to mention the resale value of something that cannot be serviced by the manufacturer will take a huge hit.

And THIS is the part I'm most afraid of. I did see a Non-IS on eBay, and they said they had it serviced by Midstate Camera Repair, which conveniently is about a 15 minute drive from me, so I guess that's not too bad, but it still scares me a bit... And the seller did say there was dust, but I contacted him to ask how much, and I haven't heard back yet.

I just went through the decision process you are going through. I bought a IS version about three months ago. I don't care at all about the IS and in fact am still trying to figure out if my photos look better with IS on or off. I always use it on a monopod.

The reason I went IS is Canon support. I just like the idea that if something goes wrong it can be easily fixed. I've read that parts are not always available at the places that will fix the non-IS lenses and that you may need to wait until they find them.

It was difficult paying more but I'm happy with my choice.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=934592

Unless you are getting a crazy deal, like $2,500 or less, I don't see any reason to go with the non-IS in this case. I used to own the 300 2.8 IS ver 1 and it is a phenomenal lens. I only sold it because I was using it almost 100% of the time with teleconverters, due to not shooting sports any more. Ironically I bought a non IS 500 F4.5 L, but it does have some advantages to me of the IS version (lighter, and unlike my 300 which I did occassionally handhold, and usually used on a monopod, I use the 500 on a tripod and gimball 99% of the time) and it was extremely less money than the newer IS version, and in great condition. Other than a bargain price I can't think of any advantages to the non-IS 300.

In this case you should be able to find a 300 2.8 IS for something just under $4k I should think, and I certainly don't think you could find any reason to be dissapointed that you bought it.

I have both, as stated canon service is no longer !! hence the mk2, non-IS Is a very nice lens and as sharp as the new one given the light. pay your money take your chance.

Warren

industryimage wrote in post #14380079
I have both, as stated canon service is no longer !! hence the mk2, non-IS Is a very nice lens and as sharp as the new one given the light. pay your money take your chance.

Warren

Well, the guy is going to give me 3 days to check it out, and I called Midstate Camera Repair, and the guy said as soon as I get it, bring it to them, and they can check it out, taking a few hours, and he'll let me know if it's good or not. Midstate is about a 15 minute drive for me, so I can get it there quick.

Just torn because in a way I want the IS version only because it's newer, but it will be harder for me to come up with the cash to get to the point to get one, so not sure if I want to wait to save, or go for the Non-IS. It might take a few months for me to save to that point, and I know I have some shoots coming up that I want to use the lens on.

*sigh*

kenjancef wrote in post #14380301
Well, the guy is going to give me 3 days to check it out, and I called Midstate Camera Repair, and the guy said as soon as I get it, bring it to them, and they can check it out, taking a few hours, and he'll let me know if it's good or not. Midstate is about a 15 minute drive for me, so I can get it there quick.

That is a very good situation. I'd have no doubt after they checked it out. Make sure you shoot pictures with it aswell. It has to feel good too.

For your information: I ordered a 300 2.8 non IS of ebay from half way across earth. All i have is pictures and a 7000+ 100% ebay reputation from the seller.

Still waiting for it. I'm sure i will get it but i have no idea if it's calibrated etc.

You take far less risc so i'd say go for it. If it's clean it probably had a nice life so far. It will serve you well is my guess.