fcc wrote:
> The point I want to make is that it is, IMO, misleading in the extreme to
suggest
> that "focusing ability is reduced if a single focusing point is manually
chosen,"
> without significant qualification. I have never seen any other claim, or had
> first-hand experience, of AF performance being worse with a single point
chosen than
> in any other mode, in Canon AF cameras.
Hi fcc,
I do have to admit that my method of testing leaves a lot to be desired, but
then I never meant it to be a serious test. The thing is that I was just
worried after I had played a little bit with my 'new' 5 and my 'old' 300.
Sitting on my couch in the livingroom, with some lights on (it was not bright
like broad daylight, but definatelly not dark. I would not even call it 'dim'
since it was still light outside), many objects with quite a lot of contrast
around (furniture, books, stuff like that) I found that the 5 with ECF would
hunt a lot more for focus than the 300 with all focussing points selected. In
some cases, the 5 was not able to focus at all, where the 300 at no time during
my little unsientific test failed in this respect. I used the same lens (28-135
IS) on both cameras and I tried to focus on the same objects. So what I meant by
'AF performance' was 'the ability to lock into focus'.
And for me this 'fact' was pretty worrying!
But then, after I played around a bit more I did come to the conclusion that:
Both the 5 and the 300 will focus quick and without problems if all focussing
points are selected on both cameras, leaving the choice for which focusing
points to use up to the camera.
Both the 5 and the 300 will have more trouble locking into focus if I use ECF on
the 5 or manually select a focussing point on the 300. In this later case I
don't remember very well which focussing point I used/selected, but I guess it
was the center one, with both the 5 and the 300.
I hope I have clariefied some things, or at least succeeded in explaining what I
did. I will do some more non-serious testing tonight, to see if I myself am
still convinced by my previous observations.
Does anybody have any ideas how I could make this test a bit more scientific?
Regards,
Bart
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
