Does the additional stop of the F/2.8 70-200 compensate for the additional weight?

If weight is an issue, why not use a monopod?

The short answer is that the additional weight may make it harder to hold steady. For me, it seems, the heavier lenses make my handheld shooting more stable (has more inertia), but many people often complain about the impact heavy lenses have. How much will it impact you? impossible to say... hang about a pound of gear from the end of your 70-200/4 and you may figure it out for yourself.

To be honest though, I'd stick w/ the f4 IS. The extra stop of light isn't going to make that big a difference. You are clearly comfortable using it, and can manage to hold it steady currently, so risking a poor outcome probably isn't worth the improved IQ.

I actually went from the f/2.8 version to the f/4. At the time I bought the f/2.8 I needed the extra speed. As my needs changed I discovered I was almost always shooting at f/5.6 or slower.
I really appreciate the reduced weight and bulk. But as the Brits say,"Horses for courses."
JD

This is a personal decision. For me, the 70-200/2.8 is no problem to handhold, but I work with larger lenses regularly and that practice probably does help matters. For you, the situation might be different, but I don't really think so as the 70-200/2.8 simply isn't so heavy that it cannot be easily mastered.

So I'll disagree with Marcus. The extra stop can be incredibly useful depending on what you are photographing so the 70-200/2.8 is likely a worthwhile acquisition.

However, you might want to rent one before taking the plunge, or at least buy one from a retailer with a good return policy. That and make sure that work with the lens prior to your events so there are no nasty surprises.

I'd agree: rent! You'll never know how it lines up for you until you give it a go. Personally, I find being able to double the shutter speed to be incredibly helpful for action stuff.

Don't know if it is applicable to your situation, but some of us prefer to combine smaller/lighter zooms like the f/4 70-200 model with a few even larger aperture primes.

For indoors with no flash, the f/2.8 is almost a must. For everything else, the f/4 is great.

As an alternative: the Canon 200mm f/2.8 prime can be had for significantly less and, while it does lack IS (which may or may not be applicable here, depending on subject movement), it's light and small (no heavier than the 70-200 f/4 IS).

you will never whine about the weight as you're looking through the gorgeous shots the 2.8 affords you. I owned the 4.0, sold it for the 2.8 and i'll never go back.