# Would you sacrifice smaller LCD screen for built in viewfinder?



## waldi72 (Feb 8, 2015)

Hi. I am long time reader of this forum.

I could not wait any longer and I bought used Panasonic GX7 plus used 12-35 f2.8 lens. Earlier I sold my two Canon lenses (not top quality, so not a problem) to pay for future camera purchase. 

I was honestly ready to buy Canon camera if it included what I want. I could be next Canon client for M3, but Canon decided not to include feature I wanted most: build in viewfinder. What I wanted in my future camera was a smallest package with fever attachable accessories and with most features which are included in my Canon 7D. Although I like 7D very much it is a big camera and I found myself not to take it to some places. I often shot in bright, sunny places so for me viewfinder is helpful, also I like it for greater stability.

I know it is a common trend for cameras to be smaller and have LCD screen bigger at the same time, but let's think for a moment. Would you sacrifice smaller LCD screen for built in viewfinder? For example LCD could be 2.5" plus just a little bigger camera body size and this could allow for build-in viewfinder. I know I would buy camera like that. For what I have read so far M3 was almost perfect camera for me. Well, maybe next model. Until then I will just keep my cameras busy .

I apologize for any errors. English is not my native language.


----------



## dswtan (Feb 8, 2015)

No. I have no need for a built-in viewfinder on a compact camera and am glad Canon agrees for the M. I do not understand why people want these little peep-holes on such cameras. Complete waste of space for me -- on compacts. Add-on solution for those that want them suits me just fine.


----------



## noncho (Feb 8, 2015)

dswtan said:


> No. I have no need for a built-in viewfinder on a compact camera and am glad Canon agrees for the M. I do not understand why people want these little peep-holes on such cameras. Complete waste of space for me -- on compacts. Add-on solution for those that want them suits me just fine.



Totally agree!


----------



## crashpc (Feb 8, 2015)

I wouldn´t also. Sold my SL1 just because the viewfinder was not good enaugh. And Once I had to use it in LV mode, it was clear that I don´t need bad VF at all. Do I mis good VF? Of course! But there is no chance to get it in tiny camera anyway. So I´d say it was good move to not include it in M3. Now with 750D and 760D with even smaller viewfinders, I´m sure that only APS-C Canon way is M3. There is no other way except 70D or jumping FF, just for the viewfinder.


----------



## LDS (Feb 9, 2015)

dswtan said:


> No. I have no need for a built-in viewfinder on a compact camera and am glad Canon agrees for the M. I do not understand why people want these little peep-holes on such cameras.


Because people who didn't start photography using a phone find much more natural to keep the camera close to the eye and arms close to the body - it's also much stable and easier to find moving subjects. And all distracting elements and light are kept outside. While I find keeping a camera with arms away from the body much more unnatural, fatiguing, while on-screen data (and fingerprints) and reflection distracting and irritating.
Sure, a good OVF/EVF is costlier than an LCD, even a touch one... thereby the more they make you believe you can do without (or buy it separately), the more they earn... because they won't price the camera less even if it lacks a VF.


----------



## bf (Feb 9, 2015)

I would not either!
I am more than welcome to have the external EVF if it comes within an affordable kit; however, I do care much more for the screen quality. The touchscreen experience is pretty good even in the original M.
The only occasion I missed the OVF was working with polarizers although I could work around it even in sunny days.


----------



## dak723 (Feb 9, 2015)

Absolutely! I use the viewfinder for every shot. More stable position and able to see in bright sunlight makes the viewfinder an absolute must for me.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Feb 9, 2015)

LDS said:


> Because people who didn't start photography using a phone find much more natural to keep the camera close to the eye and arms close to the body - it's also much stable and easier to find moving subjects. And all distracting elements and light are kept outside. While I find keeping a camera with arms away from the body much more unnatural, fatiguing, while on-screen data (and fingerprints) and reflection distracting and irritating.



I share the same opinion. I find it much easier to stabilize the camera while using a viewfinder.


----------



## Maximilian (Feb 9, 2015)

Hi waldi72!

Welcome to CR. 

I also have difficulties living without a view finder. So similar opinion as you have.

The EOS M3 with the optional viewfinder could have been an acceptable compromise, but not at Canons price point. I also have concerns that the M3 could offer much faster AF without DPAF, a technology I thoght as no-brainer to be included in new EOS M bodies. But here Canon did prove me wrong. 
I am glad I didn't wait for the M3 and took a 100D as "small" camera instead. Not as small but much cheaper and with fast, reliable AF. 
(Of course not as good as the higher end bodies)


----------



## DRR (Feb 9, 2015)

The M is unusable in direct sunlight so in my opinion, yes a viewfinder is a necessity for a dedicated camera.


----------



## sunnyVan (Feb 9, 2015)

To me the selling point of eos M is its compactness and compatibility with EF lenses. I don't want to see any significant changes to its size. 

The original M has a fixed screen and is hard to see in bright sunlight but I suppose the newly designed tiltable screen may help a great deal.


----------

