Just a few impressions (and not test results), using my common Canon lenses the AF speed improvements are imperceptible, I would say. May be it was there but since I didn\'t do any comparison, relying only on \"memories\", I didn\'t notice any major improvement nor did I expect it.
It does seem more responsive using my 300mm f/2.8 lens though. Maybe not quite for sport photography or bird-in-flight but I would feel more confidence in that combo now. I will have to look into trying this out for \"wildlife\" later in a week or so due to an upcoming trip tomorrow. When I turn off the camera, the IS of Canon lenses that have that feature, does make a regular noise, similar to that generates by a Canon body. Yes, I remembered it being louder before.
I do not see any changes for the worse from playing with it briefly relative to the .43. If, then some improvements actually. So, the .46 FW stays .
Just a few impressions (and not test results), using my common Canon lenses the AF speed improvements are imperceptible, I would say. May be it was there but since I didn\'t do any comparison, relying only on \"memories\", I didn\'t notice any major improvement nor did I expect it.
It does seem more responsive using my 300mm f/2.8 lens though. Maybe not quite for sport photography or bird-in-flight but I would feel more confidence in that combo now. I will have to look into trying this out for \"wildlife\" later in a week or so due to an upcoming trip tomorrow. When I turn off the camera, the IS of Canon lenses that have that feature, does make a regular noise, similar to that generates by a Canon body. Yes, I remembered it being louder before.
I do not see any changes for the worse from playing with it briefly relative to the .43. If, then some improvements. So, the .46 FW stays .
Nov 10, 2015 at 11:53 AM
Previous versions of AGeoJO's message #13282843 « A7RII and Canon lenses AF compatibility »
.