So, I got the call yesterday that my RF 100-300 is in :-). Thank you Kenzie’s Dad, ArtSupreme and Robert, etc. for your previous inputs. Now, I have to make a tough decision. Since I’m heading to Tanzania in a few weeks, am I ready to replace the R3/adapter/500II/1.4x with the R3/100-300/2x? It goes against the majority of opinions for wildlife; but I would love to travel lighter and more streamlined. And, I like the flexibility of being able to zoom in/out. In terms of image quality, my frame of reference is the 500II/1.4 and not the 400/2.8; and, I will be shooting on a beanbag, not handheld. So, am I nuts? I traveled with the 500+300/2.8+70-200/2.8 in the past and don’t want to go that route. I keep thinking: what’s the worse case…switch to the 1.4 and get closer. What’s crucial is that Rob’s Kenzie and Puffin images, etc. with the 2x are reasonable expectations and not the exception. Also, I’d replace the 100-500 (not my fav in terms of tonality) with a 70-200/2.8 and add a 35macro. Your 2 cents?
