Quote Originally Posted by HDNitehawk View Post
I bought the 24-105 about five years ago, took it back a few weeks later and bought the f/2.8.
I just can't see this move for a weight savings, it doesn't look like enough to matter.
For the IS maybe, not weight.
I suppose I forgot to mention the bonus of the IS. I feel like having IS will prompt me to take my camera to more places (spur of the moment outings) than in the past.

I tend to always use a tripod when doing most of my shoots (Landscape is my most shot subject). I tend to miss a lot of shots because I don't want to or dont have time to take out my tripod and set up for the shot. However, IS would allow me to narrow the aperture a bit more and take lower ISO shots that I couldn't have done hand held otherwise (This is in a situation where I don't have my tripod with me, mind you).

So, I guess what I'm saying is, The IS should allow me to take more shots in situations that I am ususally less comfortable, and it will weigh less, and will be more insconspicuous than the 24-70.