Not a bad product. Buy an offer.

Of course, the comparison is pushing for the VF-2 viewfinder immediately. In particular, since both models are as EIA close together. 229 for the VF-2 to 199 for the VF. 3

The positive aspects of the VF-3 are quickly obvious: Outwardly, he builds a little smaller than the VF-2. There is a lock that holds the accessory port / hotshoe the VF-3. Also screening in a basic position was added together so that the viewfinder is not inadvertently flips up. The diopter adjustment is easier to achieve and has detents.

In champagnerfarben it looks classy, ​​and also the square shape tells me more than that of the VF-2. This is available for this in simple black.

Exciting it is now on the technical side. During the VF-2 1.44 million (sub-) pixels (SVGA 800x600) and a magnification of 1.15 times offers an impressively sharp viewfinder image, only a panel with 0,821,000 (sub-) pixels was the VF-3 (VGA 640x480) used. The increase was also reduced to 1.0-fold. Thus, the viewfinder image is displayed smaller than the VF-2, so that the reduction of the resolution should not be noticeable right away.
Remained the same is the distance from the eye to about 18 mm and the Dioptrinverstellung from -3.0 to +1.0.

In practice, it looks to me now like that of the VF-3 with respect to the VF-2 is as expected a smaller viewfinder. Although the increase was reduced, you can see the VF-3 with a practiced eye, the individual pixels of the square Sichen LED matrix. The VF-2 makes this much better and represents the higher resolution, differentiating finer viewfinder image. Also, the VF-3 does not seem quite up to the brilliance of the VF-2 to reach and in very difficult situations he shows, probably due to the low resolution , before a slight moire effect. There is also with fast movements sometimes a slight ghosting, I can not watch the VF-2.

And yet I would not say that the VF-3 is a bad product. The VF-2 is clearly the better optical viewfinder. On VF-3, however, many other things have been improved in the user interface. In addition, the viewfinder on the camera menu can still be in color and brightness adjust (naturally also applies to the VF-2).

My Conclusion:

For those who have previously shunned the high cost of the VF-2 and simply need every now and then a simple viewfinder to establish their motive, the VF-3 is a good solution, provided for a special price and not to its MSRP of 199 he to is getting. The difference between the MSRP of the VF-3 and VF-2 is too low, as that one should give the VF-3 preferred in this case.
If the VF-3, however, is to get favorable than supply, eg for 50% of the EIA, should those who have previously shunned the cost of a VF-2 access.

Those who want the best viewfinder, so continue to buy the VF-2, but must accept the high cost. Who comes up with a good, but not outstanding product deal, picks up the VF-3, if it is to get low.

I use the VF-3 to my PEN E-PL3 that a fairly small image in 4: 3 mode shows on the display and am satisfied in every case. Who zoom comes with normal requirements and has earned him favorable, will surely be asked also satisfied.