digital camera - viewfinder or not?

elsien

I'm a bit confused because I'm getting mixed messages as to whether a viewfinder is necessary. Some friends say yes, some say they've never used it, and most camera reviews I've seen don't mention it at all.
I'm considering the Panasonic TZ3, and wondered if anyone with one of these has found the lack of a viewfinder a problem? If it's so important, why does an expensive (to me, anyway) camera not have one?

isofa

I'd never buy a camera without a viewfinder, without it you'll always have to use the power sapping screen to take photos IMO.

I have a professional Canon DSLR for my pro work and a Ixus for quick snaps, but would never have purchased the Ixus if it didn't have a viewfinder.

You'd never find a professional camera without a viewfinder.

roddydogs

Also you cant see it it bright Sunlight-think cash machines!"

elsien

So they say, but my mum says she used hers in Vietnam last year without any problems. If it's such a problem, why aren't they standard on all digital cameras? (Bear with me, I'm a technophobe.)

Red_Rose_Exile

The LCD screens are standard on virtually all digis, but can be turned off and on if the camera has a viewfinder. If the camera has no view finder then the lcd screen remains on while the camera is on which is power sapping

Some people don't like viewfinders, as it doesn't make for great point and shoot, and it also adds to the cost of the camera

Farway

elsien wrote: »

So they say, but my mum says she used hers in Vietnam last year without any problems. If it's such a problem, why aren't they standard on all digital cameras? (Bear with me, I'm a technophobe.)

Cost basically

Always get one with a viewfinder for reasons already stated, if you can get a real "digital" / SLR type of viewfinder even better

elsien

so what would be an equivalent camera to the Panasonic with viewfinder - any suggestions? I like the look of it because it looks pretty straightforward while having a good zoom, and reasonable wide angle shots.

Millionaire

Thought I'd throw my 2 pennies worth in.

Since I've owned various digital cameras with a screen and viewfinder I have never once used the viewfinder in all kinds of lighting conditions over 3-4 years.

Personal choice really. Some find em useful, some don't, Thus why it would not bother me if it had one or not.

toasterman

I was disappointed to start with my Lumix DMC-FZ8 didn't have an oldskool-type of viewfinder.

It's got the main LCD screen, and this digital viewfinder. To be honest I don't really see the point of the digital viewfinder - it's just the same as using the screen, only smaller. I was concerned for battery life, but I've taken the camera out for a couple of days and taken loads of pictures using the main LCD screen, different modes, fiddling with settings, zoom, etc, and I lose maybe half battery if that.

While I'd still rather have a real "what the lense sees" viewfinder, it's not caused me any huge problem so far.

One thing I do have to give the Panasonic's is the zoom. Absolutely brilliant. Everyone told me before I bought it you couldn't have 12x optical zoom without a tripod, and all the shots would be blurry, but I find so long as you're relatively steady, I can get a good shot even at max zoom.
No problem in bright light either really, as it has a mode for that to make the screen easier to see.

f1charlie

One advantage of using a viewfinder is that it helps to keep the camera steady by bracing the camera against your face. When you're holding a camera at arm's length it's much harder to keep the camera steady (or maybe I've just got wobbly arms!).