first generation 70-200 2.8L non IS?

[Ray Cahen]

Would love to hear from anyone with experience working with one of these.

I found one locally that I'm told was the first release of auto focus in the 70-200L non IS. It is clean and auto focuses properly as far as I can tell with playing with it. The guy is asking $600.

Is there anything I should be concerned about please?
Thanks.

[Lyal Lauth]

If it works well, that seems to be a pretty fair deal.

I just sold same lens for $800 that I had for several years.

Sold it to get IS lens which is really cool.

[DouglasUrner]

If it is anything like the Nikon, it could be a very good deal. The thing to know about IS (or VR) is that it is only useful when you've got low light and a slow shutter speed will work. If those aren't the kind of conditions you shoot in, then there isn't much value to IS.

Another thing to consider is that IS and VR seem to slow down focus lock a bit. So you may want to turn them off if you don't need them.

Doug

[AR Photography]

Hi Ray - I echo the points made so far - we have the IS version, excellent for shooting lowlight at f2.8 in churches for example. It is a lot more, but for these shots alone, worth it as the B&G never expect us to get the results we do. Thanks Canon.

[Bob_Harrington]

I have the non IS version and have been very happy with it. I've used it for ten years without a problem, sharp, great results. I tried the IS version, but for what I do, it seemed slow. Attached is a sample taken with the 70-200 this past weekend[IMG][/IMG]]

[TonyPanzica]

its a great portait lens , especially outside, great for action photos.. if you are a pro, this is a must have...

[Jamie_Roberts]

Great lens, we have one and an IS too. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the 70-200 L as a zoom... period.

I'll add that, IMO, if you can find an even older, 80-200 2.8L in excellent condition, you'll get an even better $$ deal, though the AF focusing is slower and you can't use the current extenders.