Viewfinder for E-PM2?

I would like to add a viewfinder to my bargain basement E-PM2, which I bought recently for $199 with the kit lens.  I find there are available a VF1, VF2, VF3, and VF4; Amazon shows the VF2 as more expensive than the VF4 (which is $230).  Is there any conventional wisdom about which of these is most appropriate for the E-PM2?  Thanks.

(I did try to search the forum to see if this question had already been beaten to death and did not come up with an answer.)

The VF-4 is the most current, and has the best image quality and viewing ability, apparently it is harder to compose out out of some of the earlier viewfinders however I don't have direct experience. That said the VF-4 is also the most expensive. They will all work from the VF-2 upwards the VF-1 is the analogue viewfinder which originally came with the E-PM1 that works with the Olympus 17mm pancake lens, although you may need to flash the firmware on your EPM2 depending on when it was manufactured to enable support for the VF-4.

I have previously looked into this but frankly they're all over priced for what they do and if you need a viewfinder you're really better off upgrading to a camera body that has one by default such as the OMD E-M5. By the time you add up the costs you will spend in buying a viewfinder you can pretty much take off the cost of your current body and buy an OMD.

The other issue with the viewfinder is that once you mount it you lose the digital contacts that you also use to mount an external microphone on PEN type cameras which you may or may or may not wish to do.

I did a quick check however, and Adorama are currently selling a couple of VF3 viewfinders through eBay at around $150 if you are interested.

Olydude wrote:

I have previously looked into this but frankly they're all over priced for what they do and if you need a viewfinder you're really better off upgrading to a camera body that has one by default such as the OMD E-M5. By the time you add up the costs you will spend in buying a viewfinder you can pretty much take off the cost of your current body and buy an OMD.

Good point on upgrading.  I do already have an E-M1, and I bought the E-PM2 as a second body so that I can shoot my volunteer jobs with two bodies carrying different lenses.  It also is a backup in the event of a problem with the E-M1.  Thanks for your comments.

The VF-1 is a compositional aid optical viewfinder specifically for the 17mm focal length, to be paired with the 17mm f/2.8, or 17mm f/1.8.

The VF-2 is a very good electronic viewfinder, the same LCD and optics as are in the E-M5, E-M10 and Stylus 1. A rebadged, electronically identical version is also sold for the Leica M Typ 240 and Leica X2. It's biggest deficiency is that it does not have a locking mechanism-- I found it extremely prone to falling off and I had to have a safety tether on the thing.

The VF-3 is a step down in EVF quality (lower resolution and lower magnification), but it has a lock.

The VF-4 is a superb EVF, the same LCD and optics as are in the E-M1. It also has the lock.

Get the VF-4 if you can, otherwise the VF-3, I'd say. The VF-2 frustrated me. It made my E-PL1 too tall to fit in my bags (same problem will happen with the others), and I had to have it tethered onto my camera lest I drop it in the mud out in BFN. I ended up selling the VF-2, but before I did I tried it on my E-PM2 and found the layout of the camera simply too cramped to use next to my face with a viewfinder.

Also, if you want to be discreet doing portraiture or street photography, forget the viewfinder. In this day and age, nothing screams "I'm taking a picture of your entire life" louder than bringing a camera up to your face.

Klarno wrote:

The VF-1 is a compositional aid optical viewfinder specifically for the 17mm focal length, to be paired with the 17mm f/2.8, or 17mm f/1.8.

The VF-2 is a very good electronic viewfinder, the same LCD and optics as are in the E-M5, E-M10 and Stylus 1. A rebadged, electronically identical version is also sold for the Leica M Typ 240 and Leica X2. It's biggest deficiency is that it does not have a locking mechanism-- I found it extremely prone to falling off and I had to have a safety tether on the thing.

The VF-3 is a step down in EVF quality (lower resolution and lower magnification), but it has a lock.

The VF-4 is a superb EVF, the same LCD and optics as are in the E-M1. It also has the lock.

Get the VF-4 if you can, otherwise the VF-3, I'd say. The VF-2 frustrated me. It made my E-PL1 too tall to fit in my bags (same problem will happen with the others), and I had to have it tethered onto my camera lest I drop it in the mud out in BFN. I ended up selling the VF-2, but before I did I tried it on my E-PM2 and found the layout of the camera simply too cramped to use next to my face with a viewfinder.

Also, if you want to be discreet doing portraiture or street photography, forget the viewfinder. In this day and age, nothing screams "I'm taking a picture of your entire life" louder than bringing a camera up to your face.

My VF-2 fits quite snugly on my E-PL5.  It has never come close to coming off inadvertently, and it takes a slight bit of effort to remove it.  This works for me, as I actually never care to remove it.   If you can get one that fits this tightly, for a significantly better price than the VF-4, it's worth the savings, IMHO.

Keep an eye out for the reconditioned VF3 not being out of stock at the Olynpus store and get it for $79. It's like using a 1990's camcorder because the color is so weak, but the resolution will still allow you to see something in bright sunlight, compose, and even manually focus if needed, and the price is commensurate with a $199 EPM2.

The VF4 and VF2 are far better, but if you walk around with a second camera hanging from a shoulder strap, the odds are good that a VF2 might be knocked off. My first disappeared that way. I replaced it, but mainly use the VF3 now because it is expendable.

I bit the bullet and ordered the VF4.  I do a lot of work outdoors and a good EVF will help a lot.  With the good sensor on the E-PM2 and some decent lenses (sharing with E-M1), I expect this will be a very capable second rig.

Thanks to all for the detailed and helpful responses.

Allan Brown wrote:

While the VF2 and VF4 have superior IQ compared to the VF3, the VF3 is quite a bit smaller and, therefore, more suited to the body.

I have the EPM1 and the EPL5. I have tried the VF2 and VF4 on them and they are just too big.

If Olympus had not incorporated the tilting mechanism into the VF3, it could have been smaller.

The VF3 IQ is good enough, after all, it has nothing to do with the resulting photo.

Allan

VF-2 is much closer in size to the VF-3 than it is to the VF-4.   And much closer in quality to the VF-4 than it is to the VF-3.   I also don't think the lack of a lock is much of an issue, at least if the VF-2 is as tight a fit as mine is on my E-PL5 - mine's not going to come off accidentally.

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

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

JimMoyer wrote:

I bit the bullet and ordered the VF4. I do a lot of work outdoors and a good EVF will help a lot. With the good sensor on the E-PM2 and some decent lenses (sharing with E-M1), I expect this will be a very capable second rig.

Thanks to all for the detailed and helpful responses.

Good choice... I bought a used eBay VF2 for $169 to go with my bargain EPM2, and remember, you might be able to use that viewfinder with additional or future Oly bodies you acquire....

I had used the VF2 with my E-P2 years ago and knew it was good enough for my requirements.

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.

As long as you can really see the scene you want to photograph then it doesn't matter in my view what you use.

However there's a fairly good chance that when you get into your forties you won't be able to see the back of the camera without reading glasses. Then the viewfinder will become important unless you want to mess around with reading glasses on and off or wear bi-focal glasses which have their own problems.

Myself, I can see the back screen of a camera fine until I wear contact lenses for distance viewing which I do when out and about. The contact lenses then mess up my close vision.