Canon A3400 IS vs Sony S2100

Compact Showdown: Canon PowerShot A3400 IS vs. Sony Cyber-shot DSC-S2100

In the realm of affordable compact cameras, choices abound, each flaunting its own balance of specs, usability, and image quality. Today, I’m diving deep into two of these entry-level champion contenders: the Canon PowerShot A3400 IS, announced in early 2012, and the somewhat earlier Sony Cyber-shot DSC-S2100, from 2010. While sharing similar sensor sizes and a fixed-lens design, these cameras present surprisingly different strengths and quirks once you get beneath the surface.

Having tested thousands of compact cameras over my 15+ years of hands-on experience, I’ll guide you through how these two perform in various photographic disciplines, technical performance, and practical usage. Whether you seek a reliable pocket shooter for casual family moments, a travel companion, or something to experiment with before stepping into more complex systems, this analysis will arm you with a grounded understanding of what to expect.

Let’s get strollin’ and snapping.

Putting Physicality Under the Magnifying Glass

Before snapping a single frame, your interaction with a camera physically sets the tone for the shooting experience. Size, grip comfort, control placement - these elements can make or break spontaneous shooting.

Now, pull up a chair because this side-by-side comparison is telling.

The Canon A3400 IS strikes me as a nimble and very pocketable device. Its slim profile (94x56x21mm) and featherweight 126g body make it pleasantly light on hand and easy to tuck away. The Sony S2100, larger and chunkier (98x61x27mm, 167g), feels more substantial but trades some portability for a slightly more robust build quality. For street photographers or travelers prioritizing minimalism, that slim Canon charm is hard to overlook.

Both cameras feature a fixed-lens compact design, so there’s no lens swapping or the bulk of interchangeable systems here - a plus if you want simplicity.

Control and User Interface: Where Tactility Meets Intuition

Controls can either complement your creative flow or become frustrating roadblocks.

Comparing their top plates and button layouts reveals some real differences:

Canon’s A3400 IS embraces a straightforward approach. A distinct zoom rocker encircles the shutter release, letting you zoom seamlessly with your index finger without shifting grip. Meanwhile, the Sony model, while larger, features a less ergonomic zoom toggle, relying more on buttons that can feel fiddly, especially in rapid shooting scenarios.

However, neither camera offers dedicated manual exposure modes, aperture/shutter priority, or even exposure compensation - typical in this price bracket. Both lean heavily on fully automatic and scene modes for user-friendly operation. That said, the Canon edges ahead with touch-sensitive focusing on its screen, a luxury Sony’s lacks.

Sensor and Image Quality: The Heart of the Camera

Both cameras employ a CCD sensor measuring 1/2.3” (approximately 28mm² sensor area) - a standard in compact models from their era. Here’s a direct sensor size visual comparison:

Canon’s A3400 IS packs 16 megapixels, oversampling its sensor to squeeze out potential detail in good lighting. The Sony S2100 contains 12 megapixels, prioritizing slightly larger individual pixels that theoretically improve sensitivity and low light handling.

CCD sensors, while capable of pleasing color rendition and good detail in bright conditions, often struggle with noise at elevated ISOs compared to modern CMOS chips. Neither camera supports RAW files, limiting post-processing wiggle room - a significant consideration for pros or serious hobbyists.

Through side-by-side lab tests and field shoots, I noticed Canon's higher resolution results in tidier images cropping tight, albeit at the cost of increased noise beyond ISO 400. Sony’s lower megapixel count gave it a mild edge in grain control in dimmest conditions, but resolution sacrifices are evident.

Viewing and Interface: How You Compose Matters

Composing shots on a camera without a viewfinder means the rear screen’s quality and responsiveness are critical.

Both Canon and Sony offer 3-inch fixed LCDs with 230k dots resolution - adequate but not dazzling by today’s standards. The Canon benefits from touch screen functionality, which I found makes focusing faster and more intuitive, especially when critiquing portraits or close-ups.

Sony’s screen is non-touch, necessitating reliance on buttons and dials to position focus points, slowing workflow.

Neither includes an electronic viewfinder, which is typical for compacts, but this absence can challenge framing under bright sunlight.

Performance Under the Lens: Portraits and People

One of my favorite tests is shooting portraits - accessing skin tones, sharpness, bokeh quality, and critical autofocus (AF) features.

Both cameras rely on contrast-detection AF systems with 9 focus points, but Canon’s A3400 IS offers face detection and eye autofocus. Sony S2100 does not include face detection autofocus.

In practical tests, Canon’s face-detection gave it a serious leg up, locking faster and more reliably on subjects’ faces, even under moderate motion.

The A3400 IS shines in producing well-exposed skin tones with its warmer color profile and pleasingly soft bokeh from its 5x zoom lens (28-140mm equivalent) with an f/2.8-f/6.9 aperture range. Shallow depth-of-field isn’t its greatest strength but respectable at widest apertures.

Sony’s more modest zoom range (33-105mm) and f/3.1-f/5.6 aperture combination lead to less subject separation and flatter skin tones. Autofocus was slower and occasionally hunted under lower light.

Conclusion: For casual portrait photographers or snapping family gatherings, Canon’s A3400 IS offers a more user-friendly and flattering experience.

Landscapes and the Great Outdoors: Dynamic Range and Detail

Landscape photography demands strong dynamic range, sharp resolution, and ideally some weather resistance.

Neither camera is weather sealed, so neither is recommended for harsh outdoor conditions without protection.

Resolution-wise, Canon’s higher 16MP sensor allows for more detailed landscapes and larger prints. Sony’s lower megapixel camera captures sharper images at base ISO, but Canon’s extra pixels provide better cropping flexibility.

Neither camera boasts strong dynamic range due to sensor tech and price segment, but both benefit from HDR and scene modes to rescue some highlight and shadow detail.

Wildlife and Action: Autofocus Speed and Burst Shooting

Here, the rubber meets the road for dynamic photography.

Neither model offers advanced autofocus systems with phase detection. Canon’s A3400 IS adds continuous AF, face tracking, and animal eye AF is absent in both.

Continuous shooting speed clocks in low: 1.0 fps on both - effectively limiting burst modes for fast action. Sony’s slower AF response and lack of tracking features mean missing shots is more probable.

Telephoto reach favors Canon with 140mm max focal length versus Sony’s 105mm. The added reach might help in capturing distant wildlife, despite the modest zoom factor.

In my hands-on fast action trials, neither camera was ideal for serious wildlife or sports shots. However, Canon’s superior AF focus modes and slightly longer lens edge it ahead for opportunistic animal shots.

Sports and Fast-Moving Subjects: Tracking and Frame Rates

Given the continuous shooting limits and AF constraints, both models fall short for sports photography enthusiasts.

With only 1 fps burst and rudimentary AF tracking (Canon only), these cameras cannot reliably capture peak action moments.

The Sony lacks continuous AF, making it unsuitable for moving subjects.

Low-light sports shots suffer further due to high noise at elevated ISO settings.

Bottom line: If sports photography is a primary interest, neither camera is designed for the task. Look further afield in different camera classes.

Street Photography: Discretion and Spontaneity

The compactness and quiet operation matter most in street photography.

Canon’s slim form factor and quiet operation compared with Sony’s bulkier body give it an advantage in discreet shooting.

Also, Canon’s touch AF lets you react quickly, framing and focusing faster in street scenarios.

Low-light performance is modest on both, but Canon’s optical stabilization aids in reducing blur during handheld night shots.

Macro and Close-Up Creativity

Macro shooters will appreciate close focusing distance and lens sharpness.

Canon offers focusing down to 3cm - nicely close for handheld detail shots, while Sony manages 5cm minimum focus.

The Canon lens’s wider aperture helps achieve better background blur in macro.

Optical image stabilization in Canon helps steady fine detail shots, which is missing on Sony.

For practical macro fun, Canon is more versatile.

Night and Astrophotography: ISO and Exposure Controls

In extremely low light, both cameras struggle due to sensor size and lack of manual exposure modes.

Canon’s minimum ISO 100 and maximum 1600, matched with optical stabilization, gave it a slight edge in handheld night photography.

Sony pushes ISO 3200 but with noisier results, no stabilization, and limited exposure control.

Neither camera supports bulb mode or long exposures friendly to astrophotography.

Both shoot videos limited to HD 720p (Canon) and VGA (Sony), with no microphone inputs for serious video work.

Video Capabilities: Casual Recording Only

Canon A3400 IS offers 1280x720p video at 25fps using H.264 encoding; Sony caps at 640x480 VGA 30fps Motion JPEG video.

Neither supports 4K nor in-body stabilization during video.

Canon lacks external mic input or HDMI output; Sony provides HDMI but no audio ports.

Both suitable for casual quick clips but unsuitable for any serious videography.

Travel Companion Prospects: All-Rounders on the Move

Travel photography demands versatility, battery stamina, and portability.

Canon’s lighter weight, slim dimensions, and optical image stabilization favor a travel-centric workflow.

However, battery life is limited on both: Canon rated for about 180 shots per charge with proprietary NB-11L battery, while Sony uses AA batteries (two required), which may be more replaceable abroad but add weight and bulk.

Storage wise, Canon supports SD cards, Sony defaults to Memory Stick Duo with SD optional via adapter, potentially complicating media handling on the road.

Connectivity options in both cameras are spartan - no Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or GPS - which is expected given their release dates but limiting for modern wireless transfer.

Professional Use and Workflow Integration

Straight away, this class of compact cameras is not suited for professional workflows.

No RAW support on either means image editing latitude is minimal.

Limited ISO range, autofocus systems, and minimal manual controls preclude precise image creation.

No tethering or advanced connectivity rounds out the short list of professional features.

These cameras work best as backups, casual shooters, or entry points for novices.

Summing Up Performance Scores

Based on a breadth of technical tests, real-world shooting, and feature evaluation, here is an overall performance comparison:

And a breakdown of how each fares by photographic genre:

Canon A3400 IS emerges as the better all-arounder in most categories, championing portraits, travel, and close-ups. Sony notably trails in autofocus and image stabilization but holds some ground in controlled daylight scenarios.

Real-World Sample Gallery: Seeing Is Believing

Turning technical talk into tangible results - here’s a curated selection of images captured by both cameras in diverse lighting and subjects.

Canon A3400 IS front Canon A3400 IS screen back Sony S2100 front Sony S2100 screen back

Observe Canon’s brighter exposures, more natural skin tones, and better subject separation on portraits, contrasted with Sony’s sometimes flatter color response but solid daylight sharpness.

Final Thoughts: Which Compact Fits Your Style?

This detailed duel highlights the Canon PowerShot A3400 IS as the stronger candidate for nearly all casual photographers and enthusiasts seeking an affordable, reliable compact.

Who Should Choose Canon A3400 IS?

• Travelers prioritizing lightweight gear with longer zoom reach and image stabilization
• Portrait lovers valuing face detection and warmer skin tone rendering
• Macro and close-up shooters needing finer focusing and steady shots
• Casual videographers benefiting from HD recording and touch controls

Where Sony Cyber-shot DSC-S2100 Fits

• Users reliant on removable AA batteries who may find that convenience critical
• Those seeking exceptional ruggedness in a slightly chunkier body
• Photographers mainly shooting in full daylight who need solid basic JPEG quality
• Budget buyers who find the Sony on discount or secondhand deals tempting

A Personal Takeaway for Today’s Buyers

Testing these two cameras reminded me how far compact cameras have come in just a decade. Neither matches today’s DSLR or mirrorless performance, but there’s charm and utility in their straightforward approach.

If you want a no-fuss, pocketable companion to capture memories with decent quality and minimal effort, Canon’s A3400 IS won my vote thanks to its autofocus intelligence, efficient image stabilization, and overall ergonomics.

Sony’s S2100, while aging and falling short in usability and tech, still captures solid daylight images and offers a different tactile experience worth exploring on a strict budget or if you prefer AA batteries.

As always, I encourage prospective buyers to handle each camera if possible, align their needs realistically, and consider newer models if advanced features or superior image quality are priorities.

Photography is fundamentally about story, mood, and light - gear should support that effortlessly, and these compacts offer a seat at that storytelling table in their own modest yet capable way.

Happy shooting!

Disclaimer: I have no current affiliation with Canon or Sony. The opinions and assessments here come solely from extensive hands-on experience testing these models and others in real-world scenarios.