The A80, Reloaded!

Author's Rating:

Pros: Terrific ergonimics, outstanding picture quality, versatile controls

Cons: AA batteries (personal pref), no RAW mode

The Bottom Line: 
An excellent consumer digicam that addresses all of the shortcomings of its excellent predecessor. At its $400 price, there really is nothing else in its class

Author's Review
Last year I reviewed Canon's PowerShot A80 digital camera and came away largely impressed, except for two aspects of its design that I considered deal-breakers. The A80 took 4 megapixel digital images of exceptional quality under a wide variety of situations, results that were good enough to put the A80 clearly at the front of the consumer digicam class. It was also a delight to hold, and had controls so simple and intuitive that not only was it easy to learn, but also easy to adjust the settings as the situation demanded.

So what was it about the A80 that I didn't like? Well, it uses AA batteries, which if you ask digital camera users you will come with an even split on. Many like them for their long life (when NiMH rechargeables are used) and the fact that in a pinch, you can get a set of replacement alkalines anywhere from Alabama to Zaire. What others don't like (myself included) is that it is a relative pain to orient and load four cylindrical cells into the bodyor charger compared to one, much smaller LiIon proprietary battery. This is a choice that each user will have to make for him or herself. I've owned a 4 AA-powered camera, and now I deliberately shot for those models that use LiIon batteries.

Well the battery thing is a matter of preference, and while not for me, I applaud Canon for making excellent cameras that use both proprietary and AA batteries. The other thing that turned me off from the A80 was the LCD screen. The A80 had a low-resolution (67K pixel) and small (1.5") screen that despite its convenient tilt and swivvel action (camcorder style), was just too course and grainy to use for manual focus. Even reviewing images (I frequently show people the pictures I just took on the LCD) is a bit annoying on the A80s low-res and small screen.

Well, the A95, true to its A-series design still uses AA batteries, but of real significance, Canon listened to the complaints about the A80 and ditched the small, low res screen. The A95 now uses the exact same 1.8" high resolution screen as the G3 and G5, which on its til-swivvel arm makes for very convenient use and the ability to give a proper "slide show" after the shoot.

The other differences are minor. Canon added a direct print button, which I couldn't test as I own neither a compaitble printer nor use my cameras on a Windows PC (I'm a Mac user). There is also a kids and pets scene mode that appears to favor fast flash charging (and thus fast shooting). Honestly, I rarely use the scene modes and prefer to shoot on Program or Aperture Priority, both of which the A95 does well.

In fact, I own the S50, which is last-years model in the higher-end S series. In use, I found the A95 to be almost identical to the S50, which is very high praise. The only things lacking in the A95 are the ability to save in RAW mode (important if you do a lot of Photoshop work after you shoot). The other area where the A95 doesn't live up to the S-series is in the flash, which while equally powerful, lacks the ability to synchronize on the second curtain and has no flash exposure control.

I made a pair of prints at 8X10, one shot with the A95 and one with my S50, both set to ISO 50 with the same shutter speed, aperture and approximate focal length, neither one using flash. In a testament to how good the A95 really is, I could not tell the difference between the A95 and S50 images. Both were simply perfect.

Now there is one area where the A95 will leave the A50 behind (thenew S60 and S70 equal the A95's performance in this area) and that is macro. The A95 will simply focus much closer than the S50 will. I took a close up of my daughter's eye and it really looks like her lashes are reacing out of the frame. The S50 can't come close without serious cropping and loss of detail.

Needless to say, unless you are a serious photographer, you won't be missing anything choosing the A95 over the more expensive S series. Even if you are a serious photographer, the A95 still offers tremendous versatility for not a lot of money.

Finally, if you look at the marketing hype, it is the 5 megapixel sensor that Canon bills as the most significant upgrade from the A80 to the A90. Personally, I consider this to be the least important upgrade. The A80's four megapixel images already made terrific 8X10 inch enlargements, and unless 11X14s are something you do a lot of, the extra resolution really doesn't help. If you do print a lot of 11X14s, chances are you would be shopping for the G or S series as opposed to the A95 anyway.

So there you have my take on the new POwerShot A95, which incidentally my brother-in-law purchased on my recommendation. At its $400 price level, there really is no better digital camera available today.