Canon EOS M100 vs Sony Alpha a6400: Which APS-C Mirrorless Camera Should You Choose?

Both the Canon EOS M100 and the Sony Alpha a6400 occupy important niches within the APS-C mirrorless market, though they cater to markedly different user groups. Having spent extensive hours testing and comparing these two cameras across multiple photography disciplines, I’m excited to share a comprehensive, hands-on analysis that goes beyond spec sheets. My goal here is simple: to decode what each camera truly delivers in the real world - whether it’s portraits, landscapes, wildlife, or video - and help you find the best match for your photography style and budget.

Let’s dive in.

First Impressions: Size, Ergonomics, and Handling

When I first held both cameras side by side, their mechanical and ergonomic differences immediately set the tone for their respective audiences.

Canon EOS M100: Compact, Minimalist, and Light

The Canon EOS M100 weighs only 302 g and measures a petite 108x67x35 mm, making it one of the smallest APS-C mirrorless cameras available. Its slim, rangefinder-style body with a minimal button layout targets beginners or casual shooters who prioritize ease of use and portability. The lack of a viewfinder, however, means you have to rely entirely on the LCD screen for composing shots - a potential limitation for outdoor or bright-light shooting.

Ergonomically, the M100’s grip is shallow and suited for users with smaller hands or those who prefer something pocketable to carry around comfortably on a day trip or urban stroll.

Sony Alpha a6400: Slightly Larger, More Substantial Handling

The Sony a6400 tips the scale at 403 g and measures 120x67x50 mm - noticeably bigger and heavier. It includes a robust electronic viewfinder (EVF) with 2.36 million dots, crucial for precision framing, particularly in bright lighting conditions.

Its grip is sculpted more thoughtfully, catering to enthusiasts and professionals who will often shoot for prolonged periods. The control layout, as we’ll see next, reflects this intent with customizable buttons, a dedicated mode dial, and a joystick.

This deeper consideration to ergonomics often makes the a6400 more comfortable for larger hands and more complex shooting scenarios - think run-and-gun street, fast-paced sports, or wildlife photography.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality Precision

Understanding sensor performance is essential to gauging overall image quality and flexibility across genres.

Both cameras utilize 24-megapixel APS-C sensors, but Sony’s sensor edges out the Canon on several critical parameters:

• Sensor size: Sony’s sensor area is 366.6 mm² vs Canon’s 332.27 mm² - an 11% larger light-gathering surface.
• Color depth: Sony achieves 24 bits vs Canon’s 23.5 bits.
• Dynamic range: Sony claims 13.6 stops at base ISO vs Canon’s 13 stops.
• Low-light ISO performance: Sony performs better at ISO 1431 vs Canon’s 1272 in DxO tests.

The Canon M100’s DIGIC 7 processor handles the 24MP mosaic sensor quite well, offering clean images and decent noise control up to ISO 3200 - beyond which grain becomes increasingly visible. Meanwhile, the Sony a6400 uses the tried-and-true Bionz X processor with a more advanced sensor that extends usable ISO to 6400 and even 12800 with manageable noise.

For landscape photographers who push dynamic range through bracketed exposures or demand rich color fidelity, the Sony sensor’s capacity is an immediately noticeable advantage. Portrait shooters will also appreciate Sony’s marginally better skin tone gradation due to the wider color depth.

Autofocus Systems: A World Apart in Speed and Intelligence

Here’s where the two cameras diverge most starkly - and why I say they serve very different photographic needs.

The Canon M100 offers 49 autofocus points using a hybrid system combining contrast and phase detection. It features face detection and eye detection AF modes, crucial for portraits, and tracks movement decently for casual users.

The Sony a6400 ups the ante dramatically with 425 phase-detect autofocus points covering 84% of the image area. This dense coverage, combined with Sony’s renowned Real-time Eye AF (including animal eye tracking), makes the a6400 an absolute workhorse in demanding focus scenarios.

For wildlife or sports shooters especially, the a6400’s 11 frames per second burst with continuous AF tracking is a game-changer. I’ve spent hours photographing birds in flight and fast-moving athletes with the a6400, and it rarely missed a sharp frame.

The M100’s 6.1 fps burst speed with autofocus is passable for casual action but tends to lag when tracking erratic subjects or during unpredictable street photography.

LCD Screen and User Interface: Touch and Shoot Experience

Both cameras sport a 3-inch tilting touchscreen, but nuances in usability matter immensely during shoots.

The Canon M100’s screen offers a sharp 1040k-dot resolution and is fully touch-enabled for focus point selection and menu navigation. It flips up 180° for selfies and vlogging - a boon for casual content creators.

The Sony a6400’s 922k-dot screen tilts upward 180° as well - equally selfie friendly - but the interface delivers more tactile control. Its touchscreen doesn’t support full menu navigation but excels at intuitive AF point placement and focus confirmation. Plus, the addition of a high-resolution EVF spares you from squinting in bright sunlight.

In practice, the M100’s touchscreen-focused UI facilitates entry-level photographers quickly mastering the camera, while the a6400 balances touchscreen input with physical dials and buttons preferred by professionals.

Lens Ecosystem and Compatibility: Freedom to Grow Your Kit

A crucial factor often determines the worth of a system: the available glass.

• Canon M100: Uses the Canon EF-M mount, with 23 native lenses available. The selection includes several affordable, compact primes and zooms but pales compared to Canon’s extensive EF and RF lens lines without adapters.

• Sony a6400: Employs Sony’s E-mount, enjoying access to over 120 native lenses from Sony, Zeiss, Sigma, Tamron, and more. This breadth spans super-fast primes, professional telephotos, ultra-wide zooms, and specialized lenses critical for macro or astrophotography.

The Sony E-mount ecosystem's sheer size and quality variety offer tremendous creative freedom. While Canon’s M-mount lenses are fine for casual shooting, serious hobbyists and professionals often find themselves reaching for adapters to tap into Canon’s legacy EF lenses - albeit with some bulk and sometimes autofocus compromises.

Burst Rates, Shutter, and Flash: Crossing from Hobbyist to Professional

While both models feature mechanical shutters ranging 30 seconds to 1/4000 sec, the burst shooting and flash capabilities differ markedly.

• The M100’s 6.1 fps shooting speed suits casual shutterbugs but isn’t ideal for sports or wildlife action.

• The a6400, on the other hand, delivers a blistering 11 fps - impacting the ability to capture decisive moments.

Flash-wise, the a6400 supports external flashes, including high-speed sync and wireless control, presenting versatility for studio work or event photography. The M100 has a built-in flash only, restricting lighting options.

Durability and Weather Sealing: Built for the Elements?

Neither camera is waterproof, dustproof, shockproof, crushproof, or freezeproof. However, the Sony Alpha a6400 includes environmental sealing to resist moisture and dust - an appreciated feature during outdoor shoots in adverse conditions.

For photographers frequently venturing into unpredictable environments - wildlife, travel landscapes, or street photography - this weather sealing lends additional peace of mind.

Battery Life and Storage: Practical Considerations on the Go

Battery stamina is a small but pivotal factor for long shooting days.

• The Canon M100, powered by the LP-E12 battery, manages roughly 295 shots per charge.

• The Sony a6400 uses the NP-FW50 battery and significantly improves endurance to approximately 410 shots.

Both cameras have a single SD card slot, with Sony also supporting Memory Stick Duo. Neither supports dual card slots for instant backup, a feature preferred by some professionals.

With the a6400’s superior battery life, you’ll spend less time hunting for power outlets and more time capturing moments - especially useful during travel and extended shoots.

Video Capabilities: From 1080p to 4K

Video shooters will find a marked difference between these two models.

• Canon EOS M100 records Full HD 1080p video at 60fps max, encoded in H.264 MP4, with no 4K support. It lacks a microphone input, limiting audio quality control.

• Sony a6400 delivers up to 4K UHD at 30fps with 100 Mbps bitrate, utilizing the XAVC S codec well suited for post-production workflows. It includes a microphone input jack, allowing external mics for superior sound - for vloggers, documentarians, and hybrid shooters.

Image stabilization is absent in both bodies, making lens choice critical when shooting handheld video.

If video quality beyond casual Full HD is your priority, the a6400 is the clear winner.

How Do They Perform Across Different Photography Genres?

Hands-on tests in varied disciplines reveal each camera’s strengths and compromises.

Canon M100 front Canon M100 screen back Sony A6400 front Sony A6400 screen back

Portrait Photography

• Canon M100: Delivers pleasing skin tones with natural color reproduction. The 49-point AF with face and eye detection generally offers reliable focus on portraits but can struggle in low contrast or low light. The APS-C sensor produces attractive background blur with faster primes, though depth and bokeh character lag behind full-frame competitors.

• Sony a6400: With 425 AF points and real-time eye and animal eye tracking, focus is nearly flawless, enabling sharp portraits even at wide apertures. The wider dynamic range captures subtle skin tone gradations. The electronic viewfinder aids precise composition and preview.

Landscape Photography

• Canon M100: The smaller sensor area slightly limits dynamic range and detail retention in harsh light transitions. Without weather sealing, you’ll have to be cautious in adverse environments.

• Sony a6400: Higher dynamic range and superior color depth yield more latitude in shadow and highlight recovery, important when shooting sunrises or complex lighting. Environmental sealing enhances resilience outdoors.

Wildlife Photography

• Canon M100: Limited autofocus points and burst speed constrain capturing fast subjects. No animal eye AF available.

• Sony a6400: Real-time animal eye autofocus combined with 11 fps burst makes it a capable wildlife tool despite lacking in-body stabilization. The extensive telephoto lens lineup complements this strength.

Sports Photography

• Canon M100: Modest autofocus and 6.1 fps make it challenging to nail fast sports action consistently.

• Sony a6400: Fast and accurate subject tracking, with a generous AF point spread and high frame rates, enable sports shooters to capture peak performance moments more reliably.

Street Photography

• Canon M100: Compact size and quiet shutter operation aid discreet shooting. No viewfinder means eye-to-screen shooting, which some find less engaging.

• Sony a6400: Though heavier, the EVF and custom controls facilitate rapid adjustments in summation with excellent autofocus for spontaneous captures. The external flash port is handy for creative lighting.

Macro Photography

Neither camera offers built-in macro capabilities, but both are compatible with third-party macro lenses via their monts (Canon EF-M or Sony E). The Sony's broader lens ecosystem offers more specialized macro options.

Night and Astrophotography

The Sony’s increased ISO headroom, higher dynamic range, and better noise control give it a distinct advantage for astrophotos and long-exposure night shots.

Video Production

Sony a6400’s 4K recording, mic input, and superior codec support position it well for emerging hybrid shooters who want both stills and video capability without investing in separate gear. Canon M100 is more limited for video creators.

Travel Photography

The Canon’s size and minimal interface appeal to travelers wanting a light, straightforward camera for casual snapshots and travel memories. The Sony weighs more but offers greater versatility and durability, making it worthy of consideration for enthusiasts who pack for technical excellence.

Professional Workflows

Sony’s raw files and more extensive lens options integrate more seamlessly into diverse professional workflows, including commercial, editorial, and fine-art photography.

User Interface, Connectivity, and Extras

Both cameras have built-in Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and NFC for swift pairing with mobile devices, enabling remote shooting and image transfer.

The Sony a6400’s better battery life, weather sealing, EVF, and microphone input collectively serve pro-level workflows more comprehensively.

Price-to-Performance and Value Assessment

The Canon EOS M100 retails around $450, catering to budget-conscious entry-level photographers who want a compact, easy-to-use mirrorless system.

The Sony a6400, priced near $900, nearly doubles that investment but justifies it with advanced autofocus, 4K video, robust build, and professional-grade features.

When considering value, the M100 shines for casual users not requiring fast autofocus or 4K video. The a6400 pays off for enthusiasts and pros needing greater versatility and image quality at a higher price point.

Final Thoughts: Which Camera Should You Buy?

Choosing between the Canon EOS M100 and the Sony Alpha a6400 is fundamentally about your photographic priorities and budget.

If you’re starting out and crave a light, straightforward mirrorless camera that produces good images without complexity, the EOS M100 serves admirably. However, if you’re committed to growth, require professional AF performance and video capabilities, and have the budget, the Sony a6400 emerges as one of the most balanced and potent APS-C mirrorless cameras on the market today.

The decision ultimately rests on balancing your immediate needs, willingness to learn more complex controls, and anticipation of future photographic challenges.

Thank you for reading this in-depth comparison. If you have further questions or need lens recommendations for either system, feel free to ask - I’ve tested extensively across both ecosystems.

Happy shooting!

Appendix: Detailed Specifications at a Glance