i have the 100mm2.8 macro and i would only use it for portraits if i didn't have another lens with me. the macro lens shows you such a narrow depth of field in your view finder that it makes it hard to focus handheld. at least for me. i've probably shot 2000-2500 frames with it. i'd say about 10 of those were handheld. that lens and a tripod make for some sharp pictures.
Why would the macro have a shallower DoF? For equivalent FoV at the widest aperture the macro should have greater DoF than the 135. Or is there something different about macro lenses? Some clarification is appreciated.
Staying away from the 135mm vs 100mm DOF conversation, and equivalent FOV, just because it is a Macro lens doesn't change the DOF you get from a 100mm non Macro lens to a 100mm Macro lens.
@bobbysamat do you have the Non L version of the 100mm which does not have IS? What makes the 100mm f/2.8 L IS great is the fact it does have hybrid IS and can be hand held.
+1. IQ wise, they're the same. I had the non-L. Very sharp from edge to edge and renders the colors nicely. It's just that with the non-L version, I limit myself from 1/150 to 1/200 (I had to use flash) handheld. I can go as low as 1/100 or 1/60 but it will require a lot, lot of patience to shoot. I think with IS, I can handheld more for at least 2-3 stops.