If you're complaining about the 70-200 being too slow or too expensive and big. What about the 70-200 Non-IS? Or the 400 IS which also gets great reviews. Also if you're planning on using a tripod since the 200 2.8 is non-IS.. then big/heavy shouldn't be a worry.

And it's strange you complain about the speed, when you already own a f4


Just my 2 cents.. I just picked up the 2.8 IS and yes it's expensive and heavy, but it's a tank And I really wanted the IS and something I new was reviewed as being an amazing lens and also would last me years to come.


So I personally would look at the 70-200 f4 IS or not, which will give you more range and weigh about the same and the IS is what you'll pay for and if you're going hand-held and sports, I personally think you'd be better with the 4 IS or 2.8 IS.