Re: Update: Are Canon IPF printers any reliable?
Re: Update: Are Canon IPF printers any reliable?
- Subject: Re: Update: Are Canon IPF printers any reliable?
- From: MARK SEGAL <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 05:34:22 -0800 (PST)
I know of some people who will think this is an outrageous statement, and predictions do have a way of being wrong, but I predict that in the not too distant future the choice will boil down to Canon and Epson in the fine art photographic printing niche. Scott Martin has summed-up the pros and cons of the various options very nicely. I should point out to him, however, that the 4900 is also a production machine. It likes to be used. Not much, but regularly, so ink doesn't have time to dry on or in the printhead. While he says the 3880 may be "getting long in the tooth", I don't know what that means in practice. It makes gorgeous prints, needs very little maintenance, and just works - quietly. I would still highly recommend this to anyone who can live without roll-holding and for whom 17" width is enough.
Finally, to repeat a known story, all pigmented-ink printers develop clogs. The difference between them is how they get handled. Canon works around them by using spare nozzles until enough are clogged that you replace the head at high cost. Epson makes you clean them as they arise, and the life of the head is the life of the printer. I've always up-graded models long before I've ever confronted the need to change a head in an Epson printer, and I've been through the lot from 2000P-4000-4800-3800 and now 4900 (that's five printer models in 12 years). Print quality is what matters most to me and the 4900 makes superb prints. Paper handling is reliable and easy - in fact the whole printer is very manageable and Epson support has been excellent. If your environment is dry turn off the heat in the room where the printer sits, and if necessary plug in a humidifier. Run at least a couple of small prints every other day, and you should be OK. Taking into account
the current discussion in two threads over at LULA, I'm considering an extended service contract for my 4900, but I note in all that discussion a comment from Randy Carone (Shades of Paper) that his customers' overall experience from 100s of recent Epson printers has been highly satisfactory.
Mark
________________________________
From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>
To: ''colorsync-users?lists.apple.com' List' <email@hidden>
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 7:49:42 AM
Subject: RE: Update: Are Canon IPF printers any reliable?
Thank's again to Martin and Scott and Andrew and Mark and all the others who've replied.
The only reason I have a small 17" roll printer is for color management experiences and testing purposes, in advance of my clients who have larger beasts in operation. I do some occasional production for myself but nothing like 1000 prints per month. It's possible my work environment may be too dry for these inks not to clog? Last time I used my 4000 with success was in October. Had to print a series of proofs for a client. Went great. No issue whatsoever. But then a week later, when I tried to use it again, the Magenta was clogged solid, and no amount of efforts on my part did unclog it. I brought the printer to the friendly local Epson authorized service dealer who didn't replace any parts and got the Magenta unclogged nicely. So they said. When I brought the machine back home and installed it, the Magenta was still clogged, sadly. I waited and eventually brought the machine over a second time to the friendly Epson authorized service dealer, and this
time, I insisted on being there with the technician when it would be fixed. So I went and saw that, indeed, the darn Magenta was not a problem anymore. Again, no parts changed just some, I don't know, service commands, I guess. Then I dare brought the printer back home. When I tried it again, the Magenta was clogged. Really. Recently, a friend came over to try his hand at the printer and all we achieved together was a super mess : the maintenance tank had spilled all over on the floor and the desk was under an ocean of black ink. Nice. What fun that was to clean. Moral of the story? In French we say that "a cat that was burned with hot water now fears cold water" (un chat échaudé craint l'eau froide). I think I'm going to wait some more but I'm tempted to go with a 24" printer. I realize the Canon 5100 is probably due for a refresh but if sales have not been that hot, well, I could wait for a long time. HP's head replacement scheme is probably the one
that fits mostly my operating situation, come to think of it. I have read many accounts of Canon owner having to replace heads at $500 a pop. But others report having had them for a few years already without the need to replace them. With Epson, I know I'm taking a risk, the risk that their technology will eventually yield to my low production and probably too dry environment, something I can fix anyway with a humidifier. We'll see... It's not so much about money after all but convenience and long term operability, and cost of ownership in a few years too. I'd have to spend several thousands of $$ now and again in two years, and so on. But outside of ink jet printers, there is nothing! Laser is just not there, still too unstable. And the choice boils down to Canon, HP and Epson.
Best / Roger
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden