Originally posted by Wheatfield I'm not unhappy with the way they do it now with the illuminator on the screen. More etch marks on the screen would provide a wonderful distraction to composition.
Which is exactly why we have interchangeable focusing screens. You find it distracting; you needn't use that screen. I wouldn't find it remotely distracting (my previous SLRs have had focus point indication etchings, albeit not precisely scaled to match the sensor point area) , and it would be a useful feature for me.
The current illuminate-only-when-focused method doesn't work well for me. I guess where the AF point is, focus, the indicator lights, and only then do I see I was actually off a hair. What it results in is my often having to perform two AF operations - one to confirm precisely where the AF point is, and a second to focus once I put the point where I want it.
Quote: Lots of focu points doesn't mean that there is going to be slower performance. Canon and Nikon have already proven that.
...in pro-level SLRs with pro-level processors. There's no question if you have more AF points active (ie. in auto AF point selection), there's more data for the camera to deal with - and it *will* do so measurably slower than a camera with less active AF points. The only question is how much so, and that depends on the processor speed and - I'm presuming - the AF sensor type / resolution, and the sampling rate.