Olympus 40-150 2.8 with a Tele-Converter vs 75-300mm
Does anyone have experience with these two options and how they compare? I own both lenses. The 75-300 has the range I need and is definitely easier to carry, but I found it can really struggle in low light and be a bit soft. I found a 40-150 2.8 used and couldn't pass it up. I miss the 300mm range, but the speed and image quality have me using it 80% of the time for my telephoto needs.
I know this is apples to oranges a bit from the price standpoint, but now I'm wondering if I dump the 75-300 entirely and just pick up a tele-converter for the 40-150 to accomplish the same thing.
I've never used a TC for any system before, so I wasn't sure if the quality/speed sacrifices of a TC will just end up performing like my 75-300 as-is. Curious what everyone's experience is and if there's a strong preference between the 2.0 and 1.6 TC?
For reference I'd be using this for wildlife and probably some fringe motorsport and aviation photos.