Viewfinder image quality at an E-P3:
Worth in my opinion, the transition from a VF-2, in particular because of the image size. In addition are color and contrast voting subjectively better (naturally, with less over-allotments). The resolution I do not consider a necessary improvement when a sufficient size of the viewfinder VF-2.
... On an E-P2:
The image size remains valid as an advantage for the VF-4, and also color. and contrast voting. At the older E-P2 appear in fine lines or even grating structures (brick house roofs or similar) artifacts ("Moire"), when these structures are in the size of the viewfinder pixels. The cause is a lower actual resolution. In other structures, the reduced resolution is usually not visible. At an E-P3, the effect does not occur.
"Cosmetic" The VF-4 is down to the Okulargummi not greater than the VF-2 and acts relatively harmonious to the PENs despite the size. An advantage is also likely that the viewfinder looks slightly wider and thus not quite as "placed". The size remains the only (functional) benefit of VF. 3
Conclusion: Despite the price, I can recommend the viewfinder for users of older PENs because especially the viewfinder magnification advantageous for image composition, control and focus manually is. Compared with the VF-2 or the VF-3 winning is significantly. A star deduction there from me, because the processing and Materialqualtität not really correspond to the price.
----------
Addendum after just 1 1/2 years and now also on the E-P5 and the angle finder on the E-M1: Still my most important accessory to the PEN. The viewfinder mechanism is still without restrictions in order, the case proved to be relatively easy to scratch regarding cosmetics. My conclusion "good and recommendable" remains "too expensive" for the execution as well. The extra cost compared to a VF-2 I would still pay still.
