Color (7.43)
Using a GretagMacbeth color chart and Imatest Imaging Software, we tested the color performance of the Canon PowerShot A85. The software enables us to detect the accuracy of the camera’s color rendition. This is displayed in the graph below. Within each color tile, the camera’s produced tones are displayed in the outer square, contrasted with the inner squares which are error-corrected by Imatest in the chart below. The smaller, vertical rectangle in the center of each tile is the tonal ideal.

The graph below represents the color reproduction of the Canon PowerShot A85. The circles are the actual tones produced by the camera, while the squares represent the ideal. The distance between the two represents the degree of error.

The Canon PowerShot A85 received an 8.07 mean color error score. This is quite good for a point-and-shoot camera and alludes to the overall precision of the A85’s color rendition. The mean saturation score for the Canon PowerShot A85 is 103.3 percent, indicating slight over-saturation of hues, but this is fairly typical among point-and-shoot digital cameras. Many digital cameras will over-saturate colors slightly to increase vibrancy and highlights in the overall image. Although the Canon PowerShot A85 does follow the trend to some extent, the produced tones remain naturalistic and differentiate this camera from many competing models. The only tones that stray slightly are some of the camera’s blue and green hues (#18 cyan, #6 bluish green, and #14 green), which lean towards over-saturation. While this may affect some interior shots, taken under blue fluorescent or tungsten lights, as long as there is proper white balancing, overall color rendition should not disappoint.

Still Life Scene
Below is an image of our one-of-a-kind still life scene taken with the Canon PowerShot A85.

Click on the above image to view a full resolution version (CAUTION: the linked file is very large!)

Resolution / Sharpness (3.34)
Canon marketed 4.2 total and 4 effective megapixels for the Canon PowerShot A85. When we tested the resolution of this camera in Imatest, we found the camera recorded 3.34 actual megapixels per image. This discrepancy does not stem solely from the camera, but rather seems to be a result of incongruent definitions of “megapixels.” Everyone seems to have a different idea of what megapixels are and the effect they have on the camera’s actual resolution and image quality. Originally, megapixel count was used to describe the literal size of an image. Manufacturers will use the camera's largest image size to determine and market the megapixel count. The problem is that when the cameras are actually put to use, few record with the total advertised amount of pixels. Therefore, we have developed a new means for understanding these numbers and a logical method for relating these numbers to the camera’s performance.

When we import the images into Imatest Imaging Software, the software reads the image and displays the number of pixels used in the image. We take that number of used pixels and contrast it with the camera’s largest image size or the advertised megapixel count. When this is done, a camera that records 70-80 percent of the total advertised pixels is considered to be a “good” performer, while a camera that captures 80-90 percent of the total pixels is seen as “very good” and any camera that exceeds 90 percent is “excellent.”

The Canon PowerShot A85 recorded images at 3.34 megapixels. This is 86 percent of the advertised megapixel count and viewed as a “very good” score. Both of Canon’s recent releases, the A85 and A95, scored exceptionally well in terms of resolution and image quality and should be seen as strong performers within their styling and price bracket.

Noise Auto ISO (3.79)
As well as the Canon PowerShot A85 performed on our resolution tests, the opposite was true of its ability to handle noise. The A85 performed terribly on both our manual and automatic ISO tests for noise, producing images fraught with noise and appearing impossible to avoid on this camera. The 3.79 overall auto ISO noise score the A85 received attests to the abundance of noise and distortion within its images as well as the limited shooting opportunity available to its users in regards to lighting and shooting conditions. With a camera that is so susceptible to noise, images can only be shot under profuse lighting conditions and even some exterior shots (when not under direct sunlight) will have difficulty with clarity. This is extremely disappointing and continues to be a problem for some of Canon’s mid and lower-end models.

Noise Manual ISO (1.78)
For cameras that contain adjustable ISO settings, we test the produced noise at each rating available. We put the results into a regression analysis to determine an overall manual noise score. The graph below portrays these results. The horizontal X-axis represents the camera’s ISO settings and the vertical Y-axis is the produced noise.

After testing and retesting the PowerShot A85, the manual noise score still came up as the worst we’ve ever seen on any camera. There is a possibility that we received a defective model; however, as it stands, the scores are incredibly disappointing. Whenever a camera performs worse in manual ISO noise than automatic mode, it is disappointing and discouraging for any manual users. At 1.78, there is hardly an image to look at in most images, unless there is an extreme abundance of light that enables the user to shoot on the lowest ISO setting of 100.

Speed / Timing
Startup to First shot (6.07)
From the time you push the power button to the time you can take the first picture, the Canon PowerShot A85 takes 3.93 seconds. This is a typical speed for a slower point-and-shoot camera; just be sure to have your camera powered on long before any action is about to happen.

Shot to shot (8.14)
Successive shots can be recorded every 1.86 seconds on the PowerShot A85, which is average for a camera of this caliber.

Shutter to shot (5.8)
The A85 takes 1.6 seconds to take the picture from the time you depress the shutter release button. This is far too long when moving subjects are involved and will result in blurred images and a frustrated photographer.