Why you can trust TechRadar
- One of the slowest DSLRs available
- Tends to overexpose scenes
- Good battery life
Entry-level DSLRs may not be renowned for their burst shooting speeds, but even so the EOS Rebel T100 / EOS 4000D's 3fps makes it one of the slowest cameras out there, along with the EOS 2000D.
The EOS Rebel T100/ EOS 4000D's metering is handled by a 63-zone dual-layer metering sensor that's linked to all AF points, which we found to be pretty consistent for most situations, although it tended to overexpose the scene when presented with high-contrast lighting.
Another thing counting against the rear 2.7-inch display is the aspect ratio – at 4:3 it's at odds with the camera's 3:2 sensor format, so you're presented with black bars along the top and bottom of the frame when using live view or reviewing images.
While the EOS Rebel T100 / EOS 4000D features a smaller screen and lower-resolution sensor compared to the 2000D, which we'd expect to mean reduced power consumption, the EOS Rebel T100 / EOS 4000D actually matches it for battery life at 500 shots. That's nothing remarkable, but it still compares well to similarly priced mirrorless cameras, which in some cases can struggle to achieve even half that.
- Image quality solid but unremarkable
- Pleasing colors from JPEG files
- Offers a range of Picture Styles
While the 18MP sensor may be showing its age, those looking to make the jump from a smartphone or point-and-shoot compact camera will be rewarded with decent images displaying a good amount of detail. The EOS Rebel T100 / EOS 4000D certainly isn't the best in its class here, but it's a solid performer nonetheless.
JPEG images display a good level of warmth and saturation straight out of the camera, while Canon's Picture Styles are also on offer if you want to tweak the tones; portraits, for instance, will benefit from the more muted tones of the dedicated preset available.
Image noise is handled pretty well, although here again the EOS Rebel T100 / EOS 4000D isn't a match for newer models. That said, images appear to be pretty clean from ISO100 to 1600, although if you're shooting JPEGs you'll see some softening of detail at higher settings as the camera attempts to suppress noise. Raw files are a little better though, with both luminance (granular) noise and chroma (color) noise pretty well controlled at ISO6400.
When it comes to dynamic range there's a little bit of latitude in the raw files that enables you to recover lost detail, but edits can't be pushed too far before image quality starts to deteriorate.
Current page: Performance and image qualityPrev Page Build, handling and AF Next Page Verdict and competition
Phil Hall is an experienced writer and editor having worked on some of the largest photography magazines in the UK, and now edit the photography channel of TechRadar, the UK's biggest tech website and one of the largest in the world. He has also worked on numerous commercial projects, including working with manufacturers like Nikon and Fujifilm on bespoke printed and online camera guides, as well as writing technique blogs and copy for the John Lewis Technology guide.
Samsung says the Galaxy Ring offers up to nine days of battery life
Nvidia wants to democratize AI with new RTX 500, RTX 1000 laptop GPUs — but I cannot help wonder whether Nvidia RTX 4000 GPUs are a better choice
"We are building for the future" - why Nokia sees its partners as a key part in moving towards a better openRAN outlook