Originally posted by D1N0 CDAF is not very fast, just very accurate. And what is cdaf optimisation in a lens? Optics for better contrast? Or Electronics. milc systems are starting to use on sensor pdaf for faster focussing nowadays, so no need for cdaf optimisation anymore.
Light in weight because not so many heavy glass elements to move around, fast modern motor, not a big throw unless a macro, etc. CDAF is also fast, in my experience.
My understanding is that on-sensor PDAF, so far anyway, has its limits compared to the dedicated array on a DSLR which delivers better results at longer focal lengths.
Also, some MILCs like the Olympus E-M1 use a dual system, I think, though I may be wrong. CDAF for fixed point mode, and on-sensor PDAF for tracking mode (this is also to accommodate older, 4/3 Olympus lenses, I believe). It might be that a good combination of the two AF methods is the way forward. A way to remove the need for lens-camera calibration with PDAF would be a blessed relief, too.
I suspect what it comes down to is that one can make a MILC out of anything, but the standout successful ones were designed as a MILC system from the get-go.