70 - 200 F2.8 non IS and 2 x teleconv MKII

Does anyone have experience of this combo?

I will shortly get a 70 200 F.2 non IS (I've sold one kidney and cannot afford the IS version no matter how attractive) I am not sure whether to go for a larger fixed lens at a later date, more weight to carry (pain on the plane) or whether to take a punt on a teleconverter.

Re: choices,
I don't know if a 2 X converter is a good buy, or a version of a 400mm I realise there are IQ trade offs but I wondered how much would be lost.
Anyone point me to any samples/example shots?

Thx. R.

For the cost of that lens and the tc you are in the ballpark of the 100-400L which is a lot more satisfying.

It's a thought, though I was interested in the F2.8 for extra light. Obviously both / either are a large investment.

But you don't gain any extra light using the tc. You lose 2 stops adding it plus focus speed plus sharpness. Teleconverters are fine for occasional use but a poor substitute if you truly want a longer lens.

Get a 300 F4 IS or a 400 F5.6 in the future. I didn't find my Canon 2 x Mk2 extender really satisfactory on any of my lenses - the Mk3 is much better. However neither extender will really compare to a longer prime - best choice in the long run.