Just to add my 2 cents about something I've seen mentioned in EVF vs OVF discussions, people often mention how the scene through an OVF is more representative of reality, more honest colours, etc. Who cares, I would say. The only colours that matter are the ones that appear in the final file. All I want from a viewfinder is to allow me to compose. If I want to look at the real scene, can't I just lower the camera from my eye and look at it? One feature of an EVF, showing the histogram BEFORE taking the picture, has emerged for me as the most important aspect of these things. The fact that the image I see in the EVF doesn't exactly match the scene as seen with the naked eye is of no consequence to me. Obviously, others feel differently but how much of that is just habit, I wonder.
As another contributor has mentioned (I also use an Oly E-M1), EVF lag and blackout are quickly becoming things of the past (borrow an Nikon V2 and do some sports shooting), and it was never anymore than a technological problem anyway. Television cameramen have been using LCD viewfinders while covering high-speed sports action for decades and the viewfinder lag never seemed to impair their work. Early EVFs had terrible lag, it's true, but early Toyotas weren't very good either; times change.
