IS or no IS?

[TiCoyote]

I'm thinking about a used Canon 70-200 f/2.8 for wedding ceremonies. I see the non-IS version for around $1300, and the IS version (old, not MK II) for around 1900.

Is it realistic to use the non-IS version with a monopod and save the $600?

I'll most likely be using it on a 50D.

 

[chaosrealm93]

id opt for the IS if i have a choice

 

[KmH]

I'm thinking about a used Canon 70-200 f/2.8 for wedding ceremonies. I see the non-IS version for around $1300, and the IS version (old, not MK II) for around 1900.

Is it realistic to use the non-IS version with a monopod and save the $600?

I'll most likely be using it on a 50D.

By using good camera/lens handeling/holding technique, you don't need IS, or a monopod, at focal lengths of 200 mm or less.

 

[Scarecrow]

I would opt for the IS a buddy had the non IS and turned round sold it and grabbed the IS within a month total...

 

[MWG]

The IS will give you a nice advantage in low light situations but it isn't necessary as stated above