Not sure of your budget or size requirments but for $450 you can buy a Nikon D40 dSLR which comes with a pretty decent 18mm-55mm kit lens. That’s cheaper than some higher end point and shoot cameras.
It has a viewfinder and will take wonderful photos. See here: Nikon D40
So does this mean you retract your previous statement?
Seems to imply a judgment of people for using the display.
This is not completely correct. I’m from the old-school SLR days, and I learned to operate an SLR with both eyes open. The dominant eye stays glued to the optical finder, and the other eye scans the area around the camera, judging when moving elements (cars, pedestrians, zebras, etc.) will be in or out of the frame so that you can take advantage of that “decisive moment.”
I guess overall, I prefer an optical finder, but definitely use the LCD when it makes sense…TRM
No, and it is a judgement for those who are technically-challenged. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but if you can’t take a picture with a fully automatic camera faster than a person can draw the image then get a camera with a view finder and move on. I have shown a number of people that they do, in fact, have a viewfinder and they are able to take faster pictures and save their battery.
There are a couple of places where an optical viewfinder, or even a EVF has advantages. The main reasons that I won’t buy a camera without one are:
I backpack for days, and I’m often out in winter. Battery life is very important to me so I usually turn off the LCD anyways.
In bright sun on snow, the LCDs are mostly useless. Without an optical viewfinder I couldn’t really shoot.
It’s nearly impossible to track a fast moving object with an LCD, at least for me. I can track fast moving subjects (usually skiers) with the view finder to my eye that I would certainly miss if I were using the LCD.
There are times when I use the LCD, especially macros or shooting some types of video. But giving up the view finder can hurt you in some situations.
Sadly, Canon is making fewer P&S cameras with optical viewfinders.
Not if you wear glasses, it isn’t.
I wear glasses and use the optical view finder. It depends on your vision, and some of the superzoom models have a diopter adjustment.
duplicate
I wear glasses with bifocals (which I’m having problems with) and I still have no problem with a viewfinder. All you have to see is the view you want the camera to capture, everything else is automatic. I can’t say the same for backscreens which are often hard to see in sunlight. If you’re taking pictures outdoors you always want the sun above or behind you to properly illuminate your subject.
It just occurred to me that I did use it quite a bit during my visit to White Sands National Monument. Then again, that place was so white that my eyes actually hurt without sunglasses.
I think for most people, 99% of the time you’re fine with the LCD screen. It’s up to you want to be prepared for the remaining 1% (and limit your choice to the very few models that do have optical viewfinders, which may mean other compromises), or be prepared to struggle with a hard-to-see screen at such times.
I would never buy a point-and-shoot without an optical viewfinder. Here’s why … I accidentally bumped my point-and-shoot while on vacation. That caused some damage to the LCD screen and rendered it useless. If not for the optical viewfinder the camera would’ve been absolutely useless for taking pictures. Well, I guess I could’ve taken pictures “blind”. Those LCD screens are more fragile than you think. The issue is kind of moot since I’ve switched to a dSLR camera. I never use the dSLR’s LCD to compose a picture. Its only use is to review pictures already taken or to change camera settings.
On a compact point-and-should digital, I find the optical viewfinder to be almost absolutely useless. First, it’s tiny and I could barely see through the damn thing but, most importanly, parallax error drives me nuts. If you’re far enough away from the subject, it’s fine and negligible. But if you’re taking shots at at bar or table, if you go by the optical viewfinder, you’ll chop off heads. Add to this that you can’t see your autofocus points and check for critical focus using the optical viewfinders on point-and-shoots, dial in exposure compensation when needed because you have immediate feedback, etc…
Now, if I see someone walking around town shooting like this with a live-view capable DSLr like the Nikon D3, I might find it a little weird. But for a regular compact P&S? In my opinion, it’s the more sensible way to shoot. However, there’s more than one way to take pictures.