Quick question, leaving the IS model out is there a difference between an older 70-200 and a new one that I would buy. In other words, did Canon change this lens at all throughout the years? I am looking to buy one and was looking at used ones. I don't know though becuase the other issue that I have seen in used is that it holds it's value pretty well. They seem to be going for about 200 dollars less than retail on the used market. I don't know if used is the way to go either.
I'm not sure how I feel about photodo.com, there are lenses on there with ratings very inconsistant with the personal experience of people here. Perhaps it is due to variance between copies (photdo.com getting either a really good copy or really bad copy in some cases).
That said, people on here do say that the 80-200 f/2.8L ... magic drainpipe... is one outstanding performer-- as good or better than the 70-200's. I'd love to pick one up myself.
80-200 won't accept Canon TCs, doesn't have USM so no full time MF, but AF is reasonably fast. So if you can find one in good condition, 80-200 may be better... I personally had 80-200, but I needed IS so I sold it.
The older lens had a black leather " can " type lens case that is open'd from the top. The newer one has a soft case that has double zippers down the side.
The newer case is nice as you can lay the lens and case down in a bag and just
pull the zipper pull and the lens comes out from the side.
The older type lens case makes you have to take the whole thing out of your bag
and open the case from the top.....
