my first post here. Apologies if this post is in the wrong place
I always been into wildlife, as an enthusiast and a casual photographer. Now in my 50s, I have developed a new passion for taking it a little more seriously. I recently went to Ranthambore, India and shot some tigers in the scrubland with a Canon markII and a 100 400mm which I borrowed for the trip, with some decent results. I wasnt using a tripod ( bouncy safari jeep didnt help ). I also felt more comfortable using the gear hand held under the circumstances.
On my return, I got some feedback from some wildlife pros and was given to understand that my gear was wrong to begin with, and that what I should have be shooting with is a Canon 1dx, 500mm prime, 70 200, tripods with fancy attachments etc. They showed me some of their pics, which were way sharper if not better composed aesthetically.
Now to me, all of this seems too much of a jump from being a point and shoot guy to lugging thousands of dollars worth of pro equipment, though I do want to pursue getting much better.
I figured Id start with the camera that I already have ( 5D mark 2 ) and a lens which most photogs agree is a 'must have' -the Canon70 200 2.8 IS2. I've also bought myself a 1.4x series III extender.
The question I have from the more experienced guys here is that I have another opportunity to return to Ranthambore this winter, so is my gear adequate? Is what I have, better than the 100 400 that I used the first time around?
I cant afford to buy, borrow rent anything else at the moment. The idea of too much gear/weight also intimidates me somewhat, at my age,..
Any advice, immediate or for the future is much appreciated.
Thanks, y'all have a fabulous forum.