Re: 2 cents worth on Canon S9000
Re: 2 cents worth on Canon S9000
- Subject: Re: 2 cents worth on Canon S9000
- From: Patrick Fordham <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 10:17:11 -0500
I also have a Canon S9000.
I would like to ditto Keith's post.
Before purchasing our latest printer and with a little research,
we did a quick test at our photo store between the Epson 1280 and
Canon S9000 (same computer, same file)
To start, the Canon produced a better photo (exposure and color)
but I really wanted to see if the Canon would be a good as Epson.
Now I'm sure both printers could be configured to produce essentially
the same
print and It wasn't my computer and maybe the settings were off, I
don't know.
But what really impressed me was the speed.
To print the same 8x10 image, including computer processing time on
the Epson was approx. 7min 45sec. On the Canon is was 1min 30sec.
When you need to reprint a 40 page 9x12 portfolio, this time difference
was hard
to resist.
Also, I believe that I saved 50% on ink doing this portfolio.
(relative to Epson PhotoEX)
In conclusion, very happy so far.
......patrick
email@hidden
On Friday, March 21, 2003, at 10:48 PM, Keith Brodie wrote:
Hi list members:
I've been reading with great interest the occasional mention here
regarding
the Canon line of inkjets. I just want to offer my 2 cents on their
S9000
desktop model. I'm not a salesman! Just a happy consultant (and
photographer) who discovered this product on my own.
I've struggled with Epson printers and drivers now for over 5 years
(like a
lot of you on this list who've described various issues). Many
different
models, papers, software revisions, profiles (factory supplied or
custom
built with a variety of pro level ICC apps and spectros) or feelings of
anticipation at the next new model sporting big promises from Epson or
industry pundits (no flamethrowers please). What a long, strange trip
it's
been.
Last fall I had opportunity to test and profile the Canon S9000 for a
client. To my great and pleasant surprise I encountered almost NONE of
the
typical pains in the arse that I usually associate with the Epson line
of
desktops (1270/1280/2000p or similar). Don't get me wrong, I like
various
Epson models and I fully recognize their place in the market and
advances
they've pioneered. I have 3 myself. With an appropriate RIP they can
behave
quite nicely in an ICC-users environment (once beaten into submission).
Nonetheless, I found this Canon to be a whole new ball game in regards
to
factory supplied print drivers, driver settings, system compatibility,
inks,
archiveability etc. I just wanted to offer an opinion to the list on
what I
think makes them so cool. I welcome responses to this whether pro or
con.
= The printer is fast as hell. My tests with numerous 8 x 10's printed
in
less than or equal to 2 minutes at top photo resolution.
= The top end Canon brand glossy and matte papers are fluorescent
brightener
free and archival quality. They match REALLY well in color balance and
tone
on the Canon inkset and factory driver with factory profile settings.
And
they render a very neutral gray balance across the entire range from
black
to white on calibration test images (RGB) even before going to custom
profile setups (never happened like that on any epson I've used so far
-without a RIP). Pretty darn smooth tonal gradations (screening) as
well.
= 6-color with individual ink tanks for each color at MSRP of less
than $12
for each. Canon advertises them as archival but I admit I've not yet
seen
published technical specs to compare them to Epson Ultrachrome or
equivalents. Anyone? They do exhibit a very rich black.
= factory supplied software driver allows (under advanced settings
window)
for excellent ink limiting capability with plus and minus numbered
slider
settings for C, M, Y and K individually. I was able to quickly limit
the
inks to ideal ranges on custom papers. On Canon papers mentioned above
it
already behaves itself quite well at factory defaults. Just out of
curiosity
I pulled black all the way down to 0% on one test image - lo and
behold it
actually did just that in the printout and left all the other inks
alone.
Well, if it wasn't literally 0% it was under 4% (by my eyeball - not
h/w
measured). I had to pinch myself and remember that I wasn't using a
RIP. Ink
limiting lovers unite!
= The print head is relatively easy to remove and clean or replace with
spares you can order direct from Canon. I believe a replacement runs
around
$35? I'm sure the higher end models would be more. The point is they
make it
darn near EASY to deal with by a capable end user on an aspect of
inkjets
that - on an Epson - would require factory work (with all associated
delays
and expense).
= Factory profiles on Canon paper mentioned above are very good out of
the
gate (subjective opinion). And I improved on them with custom profiles
I
made that were - in my professional opinion - VERY accurate right out
of the
gate as well. Thanks to already linear response from the printer it
was a
relative breeze. I didn't even bother to tweak them afterwards. In this
regard an Epson (without RIP) can be a big pain due to off neutrals,
color
casts, linearity issues etc. and usually require editing after the
fact to
get them to that higher degree of accuracy people want. And even then
they
often disappoint. BTW many thanks to Bruce Lindbloom for those great
RGB
test files you have on your website!
= Others have complained of "micro banding' on this line of printer. I
have
not seen this on the printer I tested, although I don't refute others
who
say it did to them. Perhaps they had alignment or head cleaning issues?
= I can create, name & save custom driver setups and they actually
stick
around for further use when I restart the system (OS 10.2.3). And so
far
they default back to the last one used. Epson? Whasup?
All in all a great printer for photographers and anyone wanting to
side-step
some of the problems typically mentioned here for the Epson line with a
factory setup. I'm mainly considering it compared to Epson photo
desktop
inkjets (1270/1280/2000p or even 2200)- but not necessarily large
format.
Although linearity and factory print driver control limitations are
often
cited for those too. The one thing I wish Canon would do is follow
Epson's
lead and add a second black ink to satisfy those B&W print fans like
the
Epson 2200 tries to. Nonetheless I found the Canon grayscale printing
to be
very good. Not grainy but smooth. Very neutral and linear but perhaps
a hint
of bluish tone - but I haven't had a chance yet to try and rebalance
it with
custom slider settings (or do extended comparison between grayscale
versus
gray to RGB neutral images). Either way I saw nothing like the kind of
neutrality problems I usually see on Epsons printing B&W with all inks
using
factory software and inks (again - other than Epson 2200 which is good
due
to 2 blacks).
The printer sells for around $500. Too high for the casual user but
not for
the photographer who wants affordable quality. And WITH a RIP or
perhaps
even the new Cone inks for Canon recently announced I'm sure it would
go up
a few more notches still.
Anyone?
Regards,
Keith Brodie
Digital Integrator
email@hidden
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.