Hi All,


I have a gripped T1i and I currently have some good lenses spanning spanning 10-100mm (EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM,EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM, EF 85mm f/1.8 USM,EF 100mm f/2.8<span style="color: red;"]LMacro IS USM). Feeling the need for more reach, I am inclined toward a 70-200mm lens.


I am torn between the immediate gratification of the 70-200 f/4L non-IS, which I can purchase in time for my next trip (in a couple of weeks), or putting that $ towards the 70-200 f/2.8L IS (MkII, perhaps, depending on cost, or the MkI if the difference is significant). As my current lens collection suggests, I am something of an aperture junkie, so I am pretty sure I'll end up with the f/2.8 IS version eventually. But, it's too long for most indoor use right now (until my 2 year-old daughter gets to the point of school plays, etc.).


So, in the long run, is it worth having both the f/4 non-IS the f/2.8 IS? For those who have both, do you find yourselves reaching for the f/4 when you go on daytime excursions, and reserving the f/2.8 IS for times when you need faster speeds or IS, or does the f/4 non-IS stay at home most of the time? Or, is it more common to sell an f/4 non-IS after getting an f/2.8 IS?


Any thoughts and suggestions will be appreciated!


--John