Should I cancel 70-200 f/4 IS and get non IS and another lens?

I placed an order for a 70-200 f4/L IS and now I'm wondering....

I got some good advice from some folks in a previous post and most steered me to the non-IS. Problem is once I got $1000 in my pocket I made a bee-line for the IS 70-200 f/4. Now I'm second guessing that.

The reason is I was afraid if I got the non-IS I'd be wondering what-if all the time? On the other hand... I just looked through my photos and noticed that almost all of my 70+mm shots are outdoors. The original plan was to get the non-IS and get something like the 17-50 2.8 Tamron or 15-85 Canon and maybe a 85 1.8 prime for indoors or 30 1.4 sigma.

I ordered from B&H right at their deadline Friday night so probably still have time to change the order

Should I put much faith in my past photos or assume that with an awesome lens like the IS version of the 70-200 I'll shoot with it more?

Current lineup: t2i, 50 1.8, 18-55 IS, 28-135 IS, 75-300
Budget: $1500

Outdoors or not, it can still help in the shade etc. However wont be of much use if it's birds or insects given the speed they move at (just an example) as the shutter speed will need to be > 1/250s anyway.

Sell the 18-55 + 28-135 + 75-300 (+ maybe the 50 1.8 ) and buy the Tamron 17-50. That'd result in a neat two zoom combo.

I think you should get the is version, since i get the non-is version and I always wondering to get the IS version. It will be more usefull I think.

One thing that temps me is the 17-40 4/L and 70-200 4/L non IS combo using the 50 mm 1.8 in the middle. Would this make sense or do I need the 2.8 indoors for something like the Tamron? I also don't mind bouncing a flash.

Get the IS you will always be thinking what if. Then if the situation comes up where you need it, you'll have it.

And it is a sharper lens

I'm pretty sure you saved me some time, money, and effort... would have gotten non-IS and fretted over it then eventually would get it anyway. Thanks for talking me off the ledge. 'm going to stick with the IS I think! Cheers. I'm sure once I get it (the 70-200, it will just be the start). I got a kick out of another poster saying the 70-200 is like a "gateway drug". Thanks

well, looking at your budget and the lenses you have, you can get everything you want. keep the 70-200 f4 IS, and sell all your other lenses except the 50/1.8. you should still have just under $400 left from your budget +$500 from selling all your lenses. use that to buy either the 15-85/17-50 and the 30/85 prime.

I've owned both and the IS is much more versatile with its 4-stop IS.
Your keeper rate & sharpness will be a lot higher.
Keep the IS.

Keep the IS.

*always* get a telephoto with IS if you can. Just get the kit lens for now to use with the 70-200.
Sell your 28-135 IS and your 75-300 and use the money towards a Sigma 10-20 or Canon 10-22 or 17-40.

Another vote for IS.

Keep the IS. It's an incredible lens IMO. The IS is a big deal at times on a telephoto.

If you can afford the better spec then go for it.

Surprised that no one has suggested the 70-200 f/2.8 non-IS. Cost is pretty much the same for the f/4 IS, and you get the extra stop. If you're shooting low light, stationary objects, the f/4 IS will be better, but the f/2.8 non-IS is a great lens. I'd sell the 28-135 and the 75-300 and buy an 85 f/1.8 and a good flash w/ the extra funds. The 28-135 + 75-300 should net you enough for the 85 f/1.8, and the rest of the money in your budget would get you a 580 EX II. Or get a 430 EX II and some other accessories (gear bag, tripod, etc.).