orionz06 wrote in post #14077933
Is the 100mm f2.8L worth the $300 price increase over the non-L that gets great reviews?
Most defintely! Especially if it's only $300 now (I haven't checked prices lately).
Non-L is pretty much just macro from the tripod kind of thing. IS make the L much more versatile.
orionz06 wrote in post #14078039
If I do not use IS now is there enough of an IQ difference to get the red ring or is the $300 better spent on even more glass after that?
Non-L is great IQ-wise, the argument of IQ advantage of L is highly flamable There're comparison threads with pics out, here and on the Net. In short, it's nothing like 70-200 and 70-200 II difference, but rather very very subtle.