These two APS-C bodies are cheap right now and pretty small. The 5100 has no EVF but is really small. Given that I now have a collection of Sony primes, especially the 35, one of these might be handy. Any suggestions/evaluations/advice/mockery?
No objections from me whatsoever - I first chided myself for buying an A6000 when it was heavily discounted last year, but then I was really, really impressed how well this five year old camera performs - I quite like it, to tell the truth, and I would have a much harder time selling it than the much more "desirable" GR III. Which is to say I'm planning on selling both, but that's through no fault of the A6000 - it's because of the fact that I prefer the Fujifilm X-E3 to both, and the Fuji 27mm f/2.8 may compensate me for the loss of the eminently portable GR III ... But I disgress, sorry for that ...
The A6000 is a great camera for the price it's going at the moment, period. I know that the A6100 is technically clearly superior, but it's also about twice the price body-only. the A6000 has a usable EVF (not the best, but it's okay for framing, and enough to check sharpness for manual focusing when magnified). In fact, I've set it up to work like a sort of "mini-rangefinder" since I most often use it with a tiny fully manual lens, the 7Artisans 35mm f/1.2*. It's a lot of fun to use if - and that's a considerable "if" - you can wrap your head around its handling - control points are somewhat limited, and menu diving is not advisable, so you have to set up the camera as much as possible to your liking - and if that doesn't work, you're out of luck. It's a nifty little shooter, though - and one I often recommend for beginners, too, because there's just enough control to be had for more advanced shooting.
The A5100 is even smaller, but its whole body is designed to work more or less like a point and shoot camera - something I didn't enjoy at all when I tried it. YMMV, of course - but I'd never consider the A5100 over the A6000 at current prices.
*In fact, this lens and the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 may represent enough of an asset to keep the A6000 around - the whole setup (camera with two lenses) has cost me about $800, and considering that, it punches *way* above its weight and price. The Sigma is *the* lens to have for any E (not FE) mount system if size isn't the main priority ...
For an extra $100 (or whatever the difference in price may be), I'd go with the 6000..... a small viewfinder is infinitely better than none. The other difference are negligible. But I would also value the (slightly) faster AF of the 6000, in addition to the built-in HDR mode.