ralphc4176 Loc: Conyers, GA

If it is the Canon 70-200 mm f/2.8 lens, it's a very good lens. I have NEVER intentionally bought an IS lens. I rarely use a tripod, and my photos are just fine, thank you. I used my Canon 70-200 mm f/2.8 non IS lens for many years, until it was stolen, and I haven't been able to afford to replace it yet.
Before you buy the "used" lens, check on the price of a new one at B&H or a similar used one, if available, from KEH.

haroldross Loc: Walthill, Nebraska

The Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 and f/4 lens without IS are very good lens. For a lot of action photography you don't need IS. The one advantage is they are lighter in weigh and therefore a little easier to hold steady. A tripod or monopod may be helpful at times.

jimbrown3 Loc: Naples, FL

As the lens is internally focusing, you are holding a lens the length of a 200mm lens regardless of the zoom you have selected. I found it hard to hand hold and waited until I could get one with IS.
Borrow it and try if you can.

davidrb Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel

I have two copies of this lens, f/2.8 and f/4.0. Neither has IS. It is NOT a needed item, especially if you mount the lens on a tripod. I use both lenses hand-held and have no problems. IS is like power steering used to be, an accessory that became a necessity. The IS in the early version of both lenses turned itself off when attached to a tripod. How critical could it be if it did that? My EF500mm f/4.5L is non-IS and weighs about 1/2 of what the IS version weighs. IS can be a very expensive option, and it's value can not be established by anyone but the user/owner. If your friend is savvy about the lens you should be able to get a good deal on it. Borrow it, if possible, and see for yourself.

hj Loc: Florida

If your friend is offering to sell it to you, surely he will allow you to try it.

Anvil Loc: Loveland, CO

One of my lenses is a Canon 200mm, f/2.8 L lens without IS. I know it isn't exactly the same lens you are talking about, but this might be helpful. I use that lens, all the time, without a tripod, and I can get razor sharp images, as long as the shutter speed is fast enough. The old rule of thumb applies -- shutter speed should be at least as fast as the inverse of the focal length. In my case, with a FF camera, as long as I don't go slower than 1/200 second, hand held, I'm fine.

KennyMac Loc: Lynchburg, VA

I own the original non-IS. Look at the many reviews, you will find it is one of THE best lens available, bar none. I also used it with extension tubes & flash on my 50D for insects & butterflies before I got a macro lens. Hand-held at 1/250th or faster with a good support technique works very well. Use it with Canon 2X tele for birding in the yard on a tripod, use a mono-pod for airshows. It's definitely not a lite-weight !
Ken

Bloke Loc: Waynesboro, Pennsylvania

We all used 200mm lenses handheld back before IS came along. I used a 70-210 zoom for many years, shooting airshows and sports and anything else which came along. Never had any problems. Keep your shutter speed up at 1/250 or above, and just keep shooting!

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

When I was much younger I used a Canon F1 and prime lenses. There was no IS then. My grip was rock solid and there was no need for IS. Now my grip is shot due to tremors in my hand(getting older sucks} I now use IS but the camera shake is still apparent so that I use shutter priority to control high shutter speeds. So if you have a very solid grip you don't need IS, that's why they sell both types. Why not rent a non ISlens and give it a thorough workout. ( I am sorry for this but I just can't help myself--It all depends what the definition of IS, is)

jimmya Loc: Phoenix

I own only one IS Canon the 18-55 and I use it only for video because the IS gives me a steady cam look and really covers the hand movement.

I shoot lots with my 28-200 and some with my 75-300 which are both non IS. But to do long reach type shots it's best with a tripod or high shutter speed.

mrtobin Loc: North East Ohio

The Canon 70-200 f4 L non is. is the best deal price wise for a Canon L lens.

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

Use my 70-200/4 non IS mostly for outdoor sports and some portrait work. Outdoors easy to use handheld. In lower light found the tripod or even a monopod is best. Assume the 2.8 version would be less dependent on a support system, but always nice when you can use them.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

While all five of the Canon 70-200s are pretty darned good, the f2.8 non-IS version is the oldest and, many think, has the weakest image quality of the bunch. It's still very good, but most users who have had opportunity to compare think the others are better. Seems to be supported by Canon's MTF charts and other testing and reviews, too. The f4 non-IS is regarded better and about equal to the original f2.8 IS in terms of IQ, overall. The current f2.8 IS Mark II and the next-newest f4 IS are the only two of the bunch that use a fluorite element and it shows in that they are the sharpest of the bunch.

How hand-holdable is it without IS? That entirely depends on you, your camera and what you're shooting. On a full frame model, so long as you keep to the shutter speed reciprocal rule, you should get mostly sharp shots. Using 200mm, select 1/200 or faster. Using 70mm, set 1/70 or faster shutter speed. If using the lens on a crop sensor camera, you have to increase your shutter speeds by 1.6X.

Of course, this is only an estimate, at best. It's just guide that doesn't guarantee every shot will be sharp, but tries to predict that most will be. Some people can hand hold at slower, while others require higher shutter speeds. Practice, experience and good technique make a difference.

Personally I think the IS is worth it... especially with telephotos. I love IS, it's one of the main reasons I switched to Canon in 2001 and I now use seven lenses with it.

IS alone typically adds $200 to $500 to the cost of a lens... not $1000. The previous poster who suggested that should compare the prices of the non-IS f2.8 with the first version IS f2.8... And not with the Mark II version, which has other enhancements and the "latest-and-greatest" factor that add to the cost.

IS opens up new possibilities, slower shutter/handheld shots that simply aren't possible. The first version f2.8 IS offers about 2-3 stops assistance, while the two newer (f4 and f2.8 Mark II) have improved IS that's good for approx. 3 to 4 stops assistance, most users find.

IS is not so necessary when shooting sports... assuming you are wanting to use higher shutter speeds anyway, to freeze movement in every shot. But I find I don't want to do that all the time.... and the IS helps me make panning shots and slow the shutter down for other subject movement blur effects.

Also, IS helps stabilize the image in the viewfinder, much like it does with binoculars, and I find that very helpful when trying to track fast moving subjects (even more-so with the longer 300 and 500mm lenses I user).

Do be careful if buying a used 70-200mm. They are almost a "must have" lens for pros and tend to get used hard. I've been shooting with the original f2.8 IS for over 10 years and more recently got the f4 IS as a backup. I find I actually tend use the f4 lens as much or more than the f2.8... it's nice that it's about 1/3 smaller and lighter. Eventually I'll have to get the f2.8 IS Mark II, I'm sure, because these are among my most used lenses and eventually they'll just wear out.

If wanting to use with a tripod or monopod, be aware all the f2.8 lenses originally came with a tripod mounting ring (unless someone removed and lost it). The f4 lenses do not come with a tripod ring, but one is available as an optional accessory.

All the 70-200s are L-series, which means they all come with matching lens hoods. The f2.8 lenses use a "tulip" shaped hood, while the f4 lenses use a more traditionally squared off type of hood. Both work fine.

If a used lens is missing either tripod ring or lens hood, the Canon OEM items are rather expensive. There are considerably cheaper "clones" of both the rings and the hoods available on eBay and elsewhere that many people use and seem to work just fine. The clone tripod rings run about 1/3 the cost of the OEM. The hoods run roughly 1/3 to 1/2 the cost.

For the right price, I'd certainly consider any of the Canon 70-200s. To get a good idea of used values, to see if you are being made a good offer, I recommend doing a search of the specific lens on eBay, filtered for the "sold" items only, and taking shipping cost, completeness and condition into consideration.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

If you are shooting at 200mm + you should at least be on a monopod irregardless of any IS or not and be using good stable techniques. !

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

This is BS !

and this,

- The current f2.8 IS Mark II and the next-newest f4 IS are the only two of the bunch that use a fluorite element and it shows in that they are the sharpest of the bunch. -

is incorrect !