Hi there!
About 2 years ago I fell in love with photography, focussing mostly on wildlife. Since I'm a student I'm on a tight budget, the past years I've been photographing with several low-cost secondhand objectives. The lens with the largest range I've had so far has been the CANON 70-300 mm F/4.0-5,6 IS USM. Lately I've had the opportunity to buy a CANON EF 70-200MM F/2.8 L IS USM occasion for a verrrry reasonable price. For the bigger animals (highlanders for example, which I do a lot) the 200mm will probably do, but I also like to photograph birds and such.
Will the quality of an L-lens be that good that I will get the 'same' kind of quality as my 70-300mm with cropping? What are your opinions of using an teleconverter on the CANON EF 70-200MM F/2.8 L IS USM, the 1,4 or 2? I've read several articles about extenders, and although I do understand it pro's and con's (I think) I still find it hard to choose in my specific situation. I do love bird photography, and it will take several years before I will be able to buy anything >300mm. I did see some low-priced extenders on secondhand sites with makes me tend towards buying one, but still not sure whether to go for a 1,4 or 2. I would love to experience shooting at 400mm, but can't really imagine how it would impact quality.
I hope you can help me to make this decision, and hopefully my English is understandable since it is not my first language.
Thanks in advance!
