[JJ_SO]

I never claimed it works for dynamic shots. I was answering to your example, where you could not focus with an outer AF field, and in such a situation I would opt for focus and recompose instead. Of course I know how to handle dynamic subjects. If you were on FB, you'd know.

In any case, you obviously still either did not get my message or chose to ignore it. You just keep going on claiming that limitations you see are everyone else's limitations, too, and if someone claims it's not, you arrogantly imply those people have no clue.

I asked for civilized tone and respect for each other's opinions here, that's all.

My example. Aha. I didn't say it was a static shot - at first. So no way for focusing and recomposing. It's my finding, that focus and recompose gives me and other people much more trouble than using the proper AF-point, but then I never use AF-S - so I leave it to the readers to judge who ignores what. I think I gave pretty good examples when it's not working (which happens to be the majority of situations I take a picture).

https://youtu.be/4bCpj0HXyyw?t=238 as if Chris would have heard the whole focus and recompose debate

"I would personally always rely on focus and recompose and an OVF, for sure". That were your words. The big ALWAYS is what upsets me first, the OVF second and the sarcastic comment after my "not all DSLR-AF-points work equally well" was third. You ignore each situation an OVF is not helping a bit and you wonder that you get criticized for that?