[dichro1]

I understand the appeal of large LCD's, but a camera without a viewfinder seems crippled to me. You can't see the LCD in bright sun, you can't possibly hold the camera steady at arms length in low light, even with anti-shake. Now they are even coming out with interchangeable lens cameras with no viewfinder. It is hard to find a small p&s camera now with a viewfinder. All they are good for is bright sun (faster shutter to freeze movement) or with flash under 9 feet for the same reason. Back to box cameras?

Moved to Everything Else. Please be careful where you post, if you're not sure, post in Everything Else and a moderator will move it if necessary.
Thanks, enjoy the forum.

[raymeedc]

I wholeheartedly agree..... the most absurd photographic trend I've encountered in four decades of shooting. My subcompact P&S is a 2004 Canon S70..... 7 megapixels, 28mm at the wide end, Raw mode, & full manual metering capabilities..... one of the best subcompacts ever manufactured for the serious shooter. I was thrilled to discover Canon was intending to resurrect this model until I realized it had no optical finder..... on an expensive compact meant for the serious hobbyist?..... are they kidding? For this reason alone, I'll forego the updated specs of the newer version & stick with mine. If this trend continues, they'll soon be eliminating viewfinders from DSLRs!

[Wheatfield]

Have you looked through the viewfinder of a cheap P&S camera lately?
Optical viewfinders on this camera class have never been good, and as zoom lenses got longer, they got progressively worse, to the point of being practically unusable.
Most people now don't care, they just use the LCD, and the camera makers are saving themselves a little bit of coin and a little bit of size of camera by leaving them off.
I went to buy a P&S last year for my wife and couldn't find a camera with a viewfinder that was usable in practical terms so I just bought her some sort of Pentax Optio. She likes it, I don't use it, so it's all good.

[LeDave]

Maybe they are afraid that putting viewfinders on Micro 4/3rds will scare away the P&S users from advancing into something better because it resembles so closely to the DSLR. I still can't find any other reason of why they don't include viewfinders on micro 4/3rds in the first place, because of marketing for new P&S users? Or maybe it's to "force" people to buy viewfinders by doing what Microsoft does best and receive hard earned cash by "milking" the Micro 4/3rd userbase. Maybe Sony will be the first to do it when they launch their first Micro 4/3rds since they didn't even add video in their new line-up of DSLR's.

I myself don't find Micro 4/3rds any better than DSLR's at the moment and the only thing I can think of is for street photography or to look cool, and most DSLR users will be very less likely to switch to 4/3rds because of it's current lack of lenses line-up and it's lack of IQ and features compared to their DSLRs.

Maybe since the P&S market are still fresh, they will be more likely to swap to their Micro 4/3rds because they find it cooler and because it's new technology they'll supposedly think it's "better" to own these small cameras with interchangeable lenses. So maybe I guess this is why the viewfinder is optional, they just want to attract the P&S users, after all the current Micro 4/3rd cameras do look similar to the advanced P&S in a way, but only with interchangeable lenses.

I just realized I capitalized Micro everytime I typed it, oh well.

[raymeedc]

I don't use it, so it's all good.

Exactly. I use a subcompact a good deal of the time, as it allows me to always have a camera with me, especially when the situation deems it impractical or impossible to utilize the larger DSLR, which is quite often. To each their own, as I would take the worst optical finder on the planet over a rear LCD for practical photo capture.

[reeftool]

I'll agree that some viewfinders are pretty bad but at least you can see what you're aiming at. I haven't bought a new P&S for exactly that reason. The LCD is ok if you can see it but most of the time outdoors it's worthless. My camcorder gives me the option of both. I guess I'll stick with my 6 year old Fuji for now.

[HGMonaro]

trying to pan using a LCD is difficult too. I made sure my sons P&S's had optical viewfinders and their existance has been valued many times even if they are pretty terrible as viewfinders go

[krypticide]

Personally, I'd love to see more digital rangefinders.

[lithos]

Moved to Everything Else. Please be careful where you post, if you're not sure, post in Everything Else and a moderator will move it if necessary.

Yes, nothing makes a Pentax Forum's mod's ***** harder than the chance to move a thread.

I couldn't care less about have tourist-mode only viewfinders (ie, the LCD on the back) of consumer digicams, but when it's a "high-end" camera, for the $1200 or whatever they're charging for it, I'd better boody be getting something to look through, not just at.

Things like those Panasonics with the prime lens, and the Sigma DPs. Those have primes, so it's not like they have to make the friggin' thing zoom with the lens.

This is why the Pen fails in my eyes. It's still mutton dressed as lamb, and priced as lamb. Well, relatively speaking, it's priced like bleedin' abalone.

Of course, you could do wise up as krypticide says, and have a proper VF that covers ultrawide to short tele, and nothing else. But then that would just confuse reviewers - "The viewfinder's doesn't cover the whole range of the lenses available for the EP-1..."

Who the hell wants to try to hold a 200mm lens steady at arms' length, anyway?

[joeyc]

Things like those Panasonics with the prime lens, and the Sigma DPs. Those have primes, so it's not like they have to make the friggin' thing zoom with the lens.

This is why the Pen fails in my eyes. It's still mutton dressed as lamb, and priced as lamb. Well, relatively speaking, it's priced like bleedin' abalone.

My DP1 has a viewfinder... I'd rather have a good optical viewfinder than none at all. I haven't bought a GF1 or E-P1 because of the poor finder implementation. As you mentioned, it's easier on a camera with a prime lens, but even still, I'd love to see a high quality EVF on something like the E-P1/2. I am curious to see how the (optional) EVF will perform on the E-P2.

[lithos]

Sorry, should've specified non-external viewfinders. Those're always a pretty clumsy, inelegant solution, and don't provide any shooting data - shutter speed, aperture, AF point, anything like that.

[joeyc]

Sorry, should've specified non-external viewfinders. Those're always a pretty clumsy, inelegant solution, and don't provide any shooting data - shutter speed, aperture, AF point, anything like that.

I agree and am currently not happy with any solutions for zoom lenses. With a prime lens, a good OVF (integrated or external) is sufficient IMO.

[scalewag]

The Canon Powershot A series cameras are about the only p/s cameras that still have optical viewfinders. They also get good reviews. If I updated mine, this is the way I would go.

[dylansalt]

Personally, I'd love to see more digital rangefinders.

mmmmmmmmm Leica M9 if ya have the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$