Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS or Canon 70-200 f/4L

I've done quite a bit of research on the advantages of L and the advantages of IS, but I'd like to hear opinions and be able to ask questions based on those opinions.

I know that the L will provide better image quality and color due to the way the glass is treated.

I know that the IS will be easier to take pictures with in low-light situations. I also realize that there is a 100mm difference but I am willing to sacrifice this for now for the L glass, as I feel that this difference can be made up due to the L's quality output compared to the IS.

I do know that there is an L 70-200mm that is f/2.8 with IS and no, I don't want to wait 3 more weeks to afford it =P

That having been said, what do you have to say?

Thank you!

Look into the Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 EX HSM DG. Nice piece of glass... IS can assist you in taking images hand held at lower shutter speeds, but some say it sacrifices in IQ. It is probably nominal. If I were to choose between the two lenses you listedI would choose Canon 70-200 L F/4

What seperates Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 EX HSM DG from Canon 70-200 L f/2.8 ?

Edit: ASIDE from price.

Ummm...

Resale sucks on the Sigma. USM is .02 (Just putting a # in do not know the true spec) or something faster than HSM. Canon is White. Sigma is black and comes with hood. Color cast is slightly different. One is warmer and one is cooler. IQ is CLOSE!!! Sigmas may have to be rechipped when new Canon body comes out. Sometimes that is the case with Canon lenses, but rare...

If you haven't done so already, do a search in this forum. Lots of threads on that very subject. I was facing the same decision and went with the 70-200 f4. My mind was made up after handling the 2, side by side.

Oh, camera build is different. Canon built for monsoons and sandstorms... or close to it. LOL! Sigma is not weather sealed, but the Rebels, 10D, 20D, 30D, and 5D are not weather sealed either...

I have them both. I bought the 70-200 f/4 while waiting for Canon to resolve the portrait problems with the 70-300 IS. I tend to use the -200 more than the -300 right now, largely based on feel and balance. As fall approaches and light decreases, I can see myself going back to the -300 more because of the IS. Image quality on both is pretty comparable. The extra 100mm does sometimes make a difference, as does the IS.

If you aren't willing to wait a few weeks, you may not have much choice in the matter. It's my impression that the -300 will be very hard to find for a while until Canon gets the supply chain filled up with the new build of the -300 that corrects the portrait issue. If you're not sure what I'm referring to, you can follow the link in my sig, or look at the sticky that I believe is still at the top of this forum.