70-200 2.8 vs 4IS for soccer

"So many people get the 70-200 f2.8 and simply don't use it that much because it's such a beast"

I find the above idea hard to believe

I take this 3 pound lens everywhere; never think twice about it's weight

^^^same here. I have hauled the f/2.8 around for 10 hours a few times, including having it hanging off my 1D3. It's a solution I repeat, because of that aperture.

That said, the lens only weighs 1.2 lbs more than the f/4 IS. Unless we have any elite athletes in this thread, we're all carrying more than 1.2 lbs of extra body fat, and that's not stopping anyone. If it's your camera strap that's bothering you, then improve that solution. The lens weight isn't the end of the world.

I guess you're exceptions to that "so many people". I just hear it over and over on the for-sale forums from people selling it.

Not only is it a lot to haul for an extended period, it stands out more and it can be intimidating to the subject for up-close work.

That said; yeah, you see some people using it - for some it's their go-to.

I'm 6'4 235lbs, no weakling. I still leave it at home for most daytime sports outings in favor of it's f4 cousin (non-is - even lighter) unless I really need what it offers for that particular event (ie: low light, f2.8 bokeh, etc). For a multi-hour outing its just a bit more clunky and heavy.

Personal preference.

Yeah, it's true. Everyone is different, and I do hear complaints about the weight of the various 70-200 f/2.8 lenses. You never know on which side of that fence you'll fall until you carry one and see how your shots look with it.