L Zoom Lens Dilemma

I reluctantly have to return a friend's 100-400L which I have had the use of for a month or so. (I was hoping he'd forgotten that I had it.) It is a magnificent lens and It has provided some great images.

I am currently awaiting a backordered 70-200 2.8 IS, which I ordered due to its greater versatility, however the 400mm reach of that lens on my 50D is going to be hard to give up.

Does anyone have any experience with the 70-200 2.8 IS and a Canon 2x Teleconverter? Is it handholdable? How is the IQ?

Would I be better off sticking with the 200mm and just cropping up?

I like to shoot aircraft, airshows, marine traffic, birds, etc.

I have the 70-200 f/4, and my uncle has the 100-400l, and the 2x teleconverter. We had done some test shots a while ago and the 400l was much sharper at 400. I have seen a lot of people get the same results. What other lenses do you have? I also have the 24-105L. so having 24-105, and 70-200 doesnt really give me a whole lot. I am wanting to get the 100-400 instead.

Agged wrote in post #8504631
I like to shoot aircraft, airshows, marine traffic, birds, etc.

100-400 IS

ajc518 wrote in post #8504667
What other lenses do you have?

EF-S 18-55 IS (Wifes Rebel)
EF-S 18-200 IS (Wifes Rebel)
EF-S 55-250 IS
EF 24-105L
EF-S 10-22
EF 75-300

Looking at this list it seems like I have the 70-200 range pretty well covered. I was just looking for better low light ability and IQ.

May have to re-think this.

I have owned every version of the 70-200 that Canon makes. I currently am using the 2.8L IS. I can tell you first hand that these lenses do not like the teleconverters. I know some people use them, but the IQ takes a real hit. Particularly with the 2X. These converters were designed primarily for the super telephoto lenses. Both work great on my 300/2.8 and the 1.4X works great on the 500/4. The 2X is acceptable on the 500/4, but just.

If you want some versatility and the ability to get to 400mm, then go with the 100-400. I also have that lens and it is leaps and bounds ahead of a 70-200 with converters. Much, much better.

I never put a converter on one of my zooms. Never. In my opinion, the image quality sux.

Here is a link to a recent post of some birds I shot with the 100-400....

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=741619

I don't believe you would ever get that kind of detail with a converter on a 70-200 zoom. And, those images were shot hand held.

Canon's 1.4x extender paired with the 70-200 f/2.8L IS on my 20D provides some very acceptable images for me. Bear in mind that I do NOT use any filters for "protection" of my lenses.