Viewfinder for E-PM2?

Olymore wrote:

I would say the viewfinder has everything to do with the resulting photograph.

In fact if it was a choice between a better sensor or a better viewfinder I would choose the viewfinder.

If you can't see the scene very well you're not going to notice all those little flaws in the composition.

And a technically perfect but poorly composed photograph is a lot worse than technically imperfect but well composed one. A little bit of noise or blown highlights in the sky is not going to ruin a great shot

You know, this might be a great reason to go with a poorer viewfinder. With a better viewfinder you might end up obsessing over the small details that don't matter. With the low quality viewfinder in the VF3, or the abomination in the Sony A3000, all you're going to end up seeing when the light is bright enough is the coarse, high contrast features--all you really need for composition. It gives you enough information to place everything where you want it and to make sure there isn't a tree branch poking in through the side.

However, the viewfinder in the A3000 is absolutely not enjoyable to use, and the only reason I use it is as a means to an end. I'm a strong advocate in enjoying your gear, because the more you enjoy it the more you use it when you need it, and the more you get your money's worth. That's why I went from a Manfrotto ball head which was technically fine but a pain to use to the far more expensive Markins Q10 which is wonderful. Even though the VF-2 was a very nice viewfinder to look through, and even though it looked better on the E-PM2 than on the E-PL1, the mechanics of the VF-2 frustrated me to no end.

Unless you're spending all day photographing stuff for catalogues of course..

If you're spending all day photographing stuff for catalogs, you probably have something other than the viewfinder in your hot shoe-- rather precluding the idea of using the viewfinder anyway.