300mm f/4 IS, 400mm f/5.6 or something else, for stock and hobby

Hello,

I am a stock photographer and normally I am always looking for gear that would only bring more revenue from the photos I sell at agencies.
However, this time I thought I could also cut some slack to my hobby which is of course, photography and get some gear for what I would rather LIKE to shoot, than SELL on stock.

But wouldn't hurt to combine those 2, isn't it? So, what I need is a tele for some wildlife which is something I would like to do for my own satisfaction, AND to use it also for outdoor portraits and lifestyle.

The hard part in this is finding full size samples of people portraits with the above mentioned lenses, the 300mm f/4 IS and 400mm f/5.6. What I saw on flickr is simply awful and I refuse to believe that those lenses are THAT bad.
The photos here in the gallery at POTN are not full size, unfortunately.


Now the question: does anyone have some full size samples of outdoor portraits taken with any of these lenses?
And of course, what is your opinion about these choices, given the requirements? Are there any alternatives?

I have to mention that image sharpness is a MUST, that's why I didn't mentioned the 100-400mm . All my photos are extremely sharp and clean, it's probably a habit developed during stock activity

My gear is: 5D (Mk 1), 17-40mm, 50mm f/1.8, 100mm f/2.8 macro.

LE: The budget is around $1500.

Why would you think images with a 100-400L are not sharp and clean?

Personally, I would suggest a 100-400, exactly for the purposes you indicate.

Besides, if you really care about sharpness and cleannes, you should replace the 17-40 with a few L-primes, and maybe the 50 F/1.8 as well (IQ good, but bokeh leaves to be desired).

Kind regards, Wim

17-40 is great, especially that I'm using it between f/8 - f/14. No need to invest in some wide prime. Also, I'm using 50mm mostly in the studio, at f/10 and above so no need for nice bokeh.
100-400 is not sharp in corners as far as I saw from sample photos. Also it could have a little problem with the dust. And my camera is prone to this, since it's first version of 5D.

Here are a couple of 100% crops taken with my 300/4.5 MF Nikkor...I know, not the 300 you were referring to but it's all I got...first was shot with my old XT, the 2nd with my old 10D, IIRC....

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

Thanks. I am still looking for 300mm samples, I already found some and I'm quite impressed. However, reason started to gain momentum and is telling me to forget about wildlife stuff and get the 135mm f/2

Xalanx wrote in post #8568528
Thanks. I am still looking for 300mm samples, I already found some and I'm quite impressed. However, reason started to gain momentum and is telling me to forget about wildlife stuff and get the 135mm f/2

That may be a better option for outdoor portraits and lifestyle, extremely sharp and clean, too, from wide open .

Kind regards, Wim

wimg wrote in post #8568826
That may be a better option for outdoor portraits and lifestyle, extremely sharp and clean, too, from wide open .

Kind regards, Wim

I know Wim... I just envy you guys when I see the topic with the 300mm and 400mm sample photos! I was trying to get some more "fun" factor in my photography

Here are a couple of shots taken with the 400 f/5.6L. I use it primarily for birds, but find it fun to use for people shots as well.

Miles, the shots look absolutely stunning regarding sharpness, resized like this. Can you post some 100% crops from the focused area? Do you think this lens can be appropiate for shooting let's say some young couple having a good time outdoors, at picnic?

Here's the full frames...

Shot this with the 300 on my 10D....

Xalanx wrote in post #8569483
I know Wim... I just envy you guys when I see the topic with the 300mm and 400mm sample photos! I was trying to get some more "fun" factor in my photography

Hey! My current longest lens is 200 mm, as in 70-200 . Ok, 280 with Extender .

I'd definitely like to get another 100-400, however .

Kind regards, Wim

wimg wrote in post #8570744
...
I'd definitely like to get another 100-400, however .

Why? What do you like at this? Versatility? How about the dust? I saw corner to corner sharpness at 300 f/4 and 400 f/5.6, but not at 100-400, unfortunately.

Very nice, kitacannon! First shot would be a good stock image I shot family pool fun this summer with the 100mm f/2.8 macro, imagine... well, came out quite good actually.

Hi, I got my 300 f4 L about a week ago, my first L and my first lens with IS, I really like the IS so simply for that reason I wont consider a 400 f5.6. Took a few pics the other day, these are both 100% crop, at 420mm f5.6 (1.4tc added)