Canon EOS M vs Canon EOS M100: An In-Depth Comparison for the Discerning Photographer

In the ever-evolving world of mirrorless cameras, Canon’s EOS M line has carved a solid niche, especially for photographers stepping into interchangeable lens systems or looking for an entry-level solution with respectable performance. While the Canon EOS M, released in 2012, was Canon’s first serious venture into mirrorless APS-C territory, the EOS M100, launched five years later, builds upon that foundation with incremental improvements aimed at entry-level users seeking better image quality and a more refined experience.

Having personally tested both cameras extensively over thousands of shooting hours - from portrait sessions and landscape expeditions to street wandering and travel shoots - I’m here to break down their real-world strengths, limitations, and which camera might best fit your photographic ambitions.

Let’s dive beyond the spec sheets with hands-on insight, technical analysis, and a balanced perspective drawn from direct experience.

A Tale of Two Generations: Size and Ergonomics

Right off the bat, these two cameras share a similar rangefinder-style mirrorless body design, but subtle differences influence handling, portability, and usability.

The Canon EOS M is compact with a solid grip for its time, measuring 109x66x32 mm and weighing a surprisingly light 298 grams without lens. The EOS M100 shrinks a bit in width to 108 mm but grows slightly in depth and height (67x35 mm) and tips the scales at 302 grams. It’s a modest increase, but the M100 manages to feel even more pocketable due to sleeker styling and less pronounced grip contours.

Ergonomically, both cameras cater to enthusiasts but the M100 introduces a more modern user interface with a tilting touchscreen compared to the fixed Clear View II TFT LCD panel on the original M. This makes live composition and selfie-friendly shooting effortless. However, neither camera features a built-in viewfinder, a notable omission I often flag for users who prefer eye-level framing.

Regarding controls, the original EOS M’s layout is minimal, sometimes requiring you to dig through menus for key settings, while the M100 cleans up the button arrangement and integrates more touchscreen gestures, improving intuitive interaction - a big plus for users migrating from smartphones.

Viewing and Composition: Screens and Controls

Viewing your scene is obviously crucial, and here the EOS M100’s tilting touchscreen wins hands down over the fixed, non-tilting screen on the EOS M. This flexibility extends versatility for shooting at awkward angles - overhead street photography, for example - or for self-portraits, where the M100 is clearly designed to excel.

Both screens share the same 3-inch size and approximately 1040k-dot resolution, which is sharp enough for routine framing and reviewing images. Touch sensitivity and responsiveness are also very similar, but the M100’s screen feels a bit livelier and more natural to use, likely courtesy of improved touchscreen tech and clearer interface design.

Top control layout comparisons reinforce the EOS M100’s forward-thinking: it standardizes the mode dial and shutter button placement while removing clutter. The original EOS M’s top plate is simpler but sometimes less convenient, requiring users to adjust settings through the rear wheel or menus.

For photographers who appreciate physical dials and customizable buttons, neither camera offers much customization (a downside in 2024 terms), but the M100 comes closer thanks to a smarter control scheme that reduces reliance on menu diving.

Sensor and Image Quality: Evolving Resolution and Sensitivity

Arguably the heart of any camera lies in its imaging sensor. Canon’s EOS M and M100 both use APS-C sized sensors measuring 22.3 x 14.9 mm, preserving the classic 1.6x crop factor, but there’s a considerable leap in resolution and image processing between the two.

The original Canon EOS M sports an 18-megapixel CMOS sensor paired with the DIGIC 5 processor, delivering images at 5184 x 3456 pixels. The EOS M100, on the other hand, jumps to a 24.2-megapixel APS-C sensor with DIGIC 7 image processor and achieves 6000 x 4000 pixel resolution.

On paper, this means higher resolution with potential for more cropping freedom and larger prints. But does the M100’s newer sensor translate into noticeably better image quality?

Yes, especially in terms of dynamic range and low light performance. DXOMark’s scores confirm this: the EOS M scores 65 overall, whereas the M100 scores an impressive 79, indicating a superior sensor and processing combo that yields richer color depth (23.5 vs 22.1 bits), greater dynamic range (13.0 vs 11.2 EV), and improved noise handling at higher ISOs (1272 vs 827).

Practically, this means your landscape or portrait shots retain more detail in highlights and shadows, with cleaner colors and less aggressive noise reduction - a boon for enthusiasts wanting to push their images in post-processing.

Autofocus Systems: Speed and Accuracy in Practice

The original EOS M introduced a hybrid AF system combining contrast detection with phase detection pixels, featuring 31 focus points. The focus speed was decent for the time, but continuous autofocus and tracking were limited, especially in challenging light or moving subjects.

In testing, the EOS M autofocus is reliable in daylight and controlled conditions but can struggle to lock focus quickly or smoothly on fast-moving subjects like sports or wildlife.

The EOS M100 significantly upgrades autofocus with 49 phase-detection AF points, enhanced continuous AF tracking, and face detection. Its autofocus feels snappier, more confident, and better at maintaining lock during bursts or video recording.

Real-world shooting scenarios - street photography and family events in particular - highlight the M100’s AF improvements. Spot-on focus on eyes is more consistent, minimizing missed shots, and tracking trackable subjects is smoother.

Shooting Speed and Burst Rates: Catching the Decisive Moment

Burst shooting speed is essential for sports, wildlife, or any fast-paced scene. The EOS M clocks 4 frames per second (fps) continuous shooting, which was modest for 2012. It’s fine for casual snaps but quickly shows its age in action photography contexts.

The EOS M100 ups this to 6.1 fps, aided by the faster DIGIC 7 processor and improved buffering. While still not blazing-fast compared to dedicated sports cameras, this improvement can make the difference between capturing a perfect jump or missing the shot altogether.

Build Quality and Weather Resistance: How Tough Are They?

Neither the EOS M nor the EOS M100 offers weather sealing or ruggedized build features. Both feature polycarbonate and metal in their construction, with the M100 feeling a bit more refined and modern, but expect neither to hold up under harsh weather or heavy abuse without external protection.

If you shoot in rain, dust, or challenging outdoor environments frequently, you’ll want to consider protective gear, or look elsewhere.

Lens Ecosystem & Compatibility: Unlocking Creative Potential

Both cameras use Canon’s EF-M lens mount and can access the 23 EF-M lenses Canon offers. This ecosystem has grown but remains somewhat limited compared to Canon’s robust EF and RF lineups.

Neither camera features in-body image stabilization (IBIS), so you’ll depend on optical stabilization in lenses or external supports for steady shots, especially in macro or low-light scenarios.

Amazon availability and pricing of EF-M lenses vary. Both cameras benefit equally from the adaptable nature of Canon’s mount – you can use EF and EF-S lenses with an adapter, but this adds bulk and can slow autofocus.

Battery Life and Storage: Practical Considerations

Battery life was never a strong suit for Canon’s early mirrorless models. The EOS M manages roughly 230 shots per charge using the LP-E12 battery, while the EOS M100 provides a noticeable boost to about 295 shots.

While neither excels by DSLR standards, the M100’s improvement is welcome for day-long shoots or travel photography where charging opportunities can be sparse.

Storage options are identical: a single SD/SDHC/SDXC card slot compatible with UHS-I cards, allowing for high-capacity and fast storage, but no dual slots for redundancy.

Connectivity and Wireless Features: Keeping Up With the Times

Connectivity sees a marked evolution across these models. The original EOS M supports Eye-Fi wireless cards (now largely outdated), while the M100 includes built-in Wi-Fi, NFC, and Bluetooth - meaning you get instant image transfer, remote control via Canon’s smartphone app, and easy sharing.

These features are crucial in the modern era if you want to integrate the camera into mobile workflows or social media sharing without fuss.

Video Capabilities: Full HD Suffices, But No 4K Present

Both cameras record Full HD video but with differences worth highlighting.

• Canon EOS M: Maximum 1080p at 30fps, MPEG-4 and H.264 codecs, external microphone input but no headphone jack. No 4K.

• Canon EOS M100: 1080p up to 60fps, MP4 format with H.264 and AAC audio. No external mic or headphone ports.

The M100’s higher frame rate mode allows for smoother motion capture, useful for slow-motion clips. However, both cameras lack advanced video features, 4K recording, and robust audio options - again emphasizing their entry-level positioning.

Across Photography Genres: Real-World Test Results

Having covered core specs, let’s see how these cameras perform in practice across different photography disciplines. I’ve captured sample shots and scored their relative strengths.

Canon M screen back Canon M100 front Canon M100 screen back

Portrait Photography

The EOS M100’s improved 24MP sensor and better autofocus mean sharper portraits with more accurate skin tones and pleasing bokeh, particularly when paired with Canon’s fast prime lenses. Eye detection AF (although limited) helps nail focus on subjects. The EOS M is less consistent, especially in low light, where focus hunting can break the flow.

Landscape Photography

Higher resolution and improved dynamic range give the M100 the advantage here. It captures more shadow and highlight detail, crucial for high-contrast landscapes, and the tilting screen helps with creative composition angles. The EOS M remains capable but shows its age in RAW file flexibility and highlight handling.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

Neither camera is a sports specialist, but the M100’s faster AF and 6.1 fps burst rate make it better suited to tracking animals or athletes. The EOS M struggles to keep pace, often missing critical moments. Both would benefit from faster lenses and telephoto reach via adapters.

Street Photography

The EOS M100’s compactness, touch interface, quick autofocus, and higher frame rate lend it a clear edge for candid street shooting. The EOS M is still usable but less discreet and less responsive, which can limit success in spontaneous moments.

Macro Photography

Close-up work demands precise focus and stability. Neither camera provides IBIS, but the M100’s autofocus is more accurate and quicker. Both depend heavily on stabilized lenses and external support for peaks in sharpness.

Night and Astro Photography

The improved high ISO performance of the M100 allows it to outperform the EOS M when shooting night skies or low-light scenes without noise overwhelming details. The increased dynamic range of the M100 also preserves stars and shadow texture better.

Video Work

While neither offers 4K, the M100’s 60fps Full HD is smoother for casual video projects. Its lack of microphone input is a drawback for serious videographers. The EOS M’s external mic jack is an advantage but offset by lower frame rate limits.

Travel Photography

Considering weight, size, battery, and versatility, the EOS M100 shines as a compact travel companion. Its longer battery life, tilting touchscreen, and wireless integration support hands-free sharing and extended outings. The EOS M works but feels a bit dated.

Professional Use

Neither camera offers professional-grade durability, dual card slots, or advanced autofocus customizations. However, the M100’s better image quality, file formats, and wireless features could suit hobbyists or lightweight pro use in constrained budgets.

Overall Performance and Value: Which One Deserves Your Investment?

In absolute terms, the EOS M100 outclasses the original EOS M with measurable improvements in sensor resolution, processing power, autofocus, and shooting speed. Canon addressed many user complaints from the EOS M, especially in interface refinement and wireless connectivity.

However, price is always a factor. The EOS M100 currently retails around $449, slightly cheaper than the older EOS M at $510, which is somewhat counterintuitive but reflects availability, promotions, and market shifts.

For the enthusiast stepping cautiously into the mirrorless world, the M100 offers a more future-proof and enjoyable experience. The EOS M might appeal to tight budget buyers or those who want a no-frills camera for casual use with legacy EF-M lenses, but in 2024 the M100 is my pick.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations

Let me wrap up with tailored advice based on your photography goals.

• If you prioritize image quality, autofocus reliability, and a better user experience - especially if you shoot portraits, street, landscapes, or casual video - go with the Canon EOS M100. Its modern features and enhanced processing make it a pleasure to use.

• If you’re on a tight budget, enjoy retro-simple controls, or want a lightweight mirrorless backup, the original Canon EOS M still works, but be prepared for some compromises. It’s less forgiving in autofocus and lacks modern conveniences.

• Travel photographers and vloggers will appreciate the M100’s longer battery life, tilt screen, and wireless features - essentials for sharing and capturing on the go.

• Serious sports or wildlife shooters should look beyond these entry-level models, but if limited by budget, the EOS M100 at least offers better burst speed and AF tracking.

In the end, owning both cameras offers a fascinating glimpse into Canon’s development arc in APS-C mirrorless design - from the pioneering EOS M to the refined M100 model. But for anyone making a purchasing choice today, I confidently recommend the Canon EOS M100 as the smarter, more versatile platform with greater longevity.

Dear Canon, now please consider bringing back a built-in viewfinder and IBIS in the next iteration - your fans have patiently waited!

I hope this detailed comparison - grounded in years of testing and practical use - helps you find the right Canon EOS M-series camera for your creative journey.