[Brightcolours]

[quote name='evilthought' timestamp='1284886597' post='2910']

That's flat-out false. Rob (a pro sports photographer) used A55 10 fps to shot a tennis game, and his conclusion was that it's perefectly usable (out of 400 shots less than 10 were out-of-focus).



You can view a short video about using the camera here......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suqFcXaU5W8



You can see the images here......



http://www.flickr.com/photos/sportsphotorob/5002118928/



http://www.flickr.com/photos/sportsphotorob/5002121532/



http://www.flickr.com/photos/sportsphotorob/5001517495/in/photostream/



http://www.flickr.com/photos/sportsphotorob/5002118200/in/photostream/



http://www.flickr.com/photos/sportsphotorob/5001513609/in/photostream/



And here is a video demonstration of 10 fps. It's no worse than black-out that you get from mirror flip





http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8b7isSlnhQ

[/quote]

Right. he is shooting a static standing "tennis player". That is not a situation where the AF would get to have trouble, now would it?

The rodeo pics... not taxing for any AF system either, he uses a HUGE DOF there too, so any focus slowness would not show. Dpreview who actually TESTED bicycles coming towards them noticed the failing capability for predictive AF. It is funny how all the time people link to not taxing examples, from subjects moving sideways. One can shoot those to be sharp without AF.



With mirror flip you get a blackout, yes. And after that you see the subject. Not so with the A55. You see what HAS BEEN. No problem with that static tennis player. A big problem when you pan to track the subject, obviously.



I guess you do not understand the downsides of its implementation.