Canon 300 2.8 IS or Non -IS

I am thinking over buying a Canon 300 2.8 L, can anybody suggest me whether non IS is worth buying or should I go ahead with IS one, I am short of cash and can only spend at max 2500 USD and the non IS version are easily available in this range.

What are the pros and cons of buying the non IS over the IS one?

Well considering that both are pretty heavy. If you can ensure that your SS will be quick enough then I would go for the non IS but if you are going to be doing more sport related work with panning, I would save for the IS. I personally would go for the IS as with someone of that calibre, I would feel like I sold myself short.

I bought a old non IS ... which is perfectly working, much faster AF than my 135L2.0 and of course much sharper than anything else I own (24LII 85LII 135L2.0).
Basically, I am using this lens with F1, QuadBike, Dogs shows, so, till now, IS was almost useless for me. As my Favorite picture are 100% the sharpest, best contrast and smoothest bokeh as possible, I do rarely any panning but take a time to get the best DOF as possible.
But I love that lens so much that I am looking forward to use this lens as a walkaround lens for candids and landscape so IS maybe would be worth is these cases

That lens is not hat heavy if you get the correct accessory to carry it I use this http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=soMGTUWAsj0 ...

I had the Non-IS, recently sold it. If I were to get it again I'd get IS simply because it's newer and if something goes wrong on the Non-IS, Canon won't fix it. It was certainly a great lens and I loved it.

At 300mm you will find the use of IS more needed then you've experienced before with shorter focal lengths. The answer is really in the $$

I have non-Is version. I like this lens and most of my sport game, I will use it. Like others say, you need prepare handle heavy lens. another issue is that maintenance issue since Canon already stop repair it, but I have checked many post here, quite big % repair work releated with IS and can not focus. I believe that if the lens does not c/w IS, at least no worry for this problem. Anyway, I have use it (17 years already), it no problem.

Working with my MK3, I can use for high ISo during the night sport (of cause need NR). So, IS for me is not very important.


Thanks!

I have the IS version and when it's on monopod IS is off. If I'm handholding, I turn it on and it does make a difference. The lens is heavy especially couple it with a 1D camera but it balances well.

If you can afford it, then go IS, if not non-IS is still a excellent lens.

btw, this lens feels like a toy after I handheld the Nikon 600 (13lbs) and the 800 f5.6

canon wont fix the non IS.... thats a huge con IMO

I've got the non-IS. I love it. It is an awesome lens.
I actually sought out the non-IS version simply because, like 99% of the guys I shoot with, I have the IS turned off. I also have a non-IS version of the 70-200/2.8.

Save yourself a heap of cash and get the non IS version