I’m looking to get a new photo printer. I have a 1200 Epson Stylus which is getting dated. I’m trying not to go over $500 0r so. I’m considering the new Canon i9900, I would like the option of getting 13X19 size prints, or at least 11X14. You all have been great help in the past with these types of concerns.
Give your photos a professional finish with sharpening in Photoshop. Learn to enhance details, create contrast, and prepare your images for print, web, and social media.
I’m looking to get a new photo printer. I have a 1200 Epson Stylus which is getting dated. I’m trying not to go over $500 0r so. I’m considering the new Canon i9900, I would like the option of getting 13X19 size prints, or at least 11X14. You all have been great help in the past with these types of concerns. Is epson planning anything new soon?
Perhaps the best price you’ll find is $583.30 from Provantage.com. If it is not a Mac specific item they are always the first business I check for hardware prices.
Well, based on all the bad luck I’ve had with my $6,500+ Xerox printer, I am listening to your warnings very carefully.
It’s too bad to hear these negative reports about the Canon though. We’ve had two canon copiers for many years. Neither one has ever needed service and both are still going strong. Also when Apple produced printers made by Canon we never had to have any of them repaired. I was hoping the new Canons would hold up to the same reputation. I have had problems with Epson and at one time vowed I would never buy anything with the name Epson on it, but have since changed my mind by buying the Epson 1680 scanner.
The main problem with the Canon appears to be print longevity, which I suspect is most likely caused by Canon papers. Prints come out of the printer looking great, but they seem to fade faster than prints made on an Epson printer made on Epson paper.
The reason I suspect the paper more than the inks is that prints made on Canon paper on non-Canon printers fade unusually fast. I realize this is far from a scientific test; that’s why I use the term "suspect".
I just started testing the i9900 and so far I’m pretty impressed. I believe the print longevity should be about the same as the 1270/1280 inkset. If it’s much shorter I’ll be upset, but I’m not looking for true archival. I’ve created one profile so far. It profiled much better/easier than my old 1270.
I have found I need to try different Media settings for each paper to find the best combination with the "No color adjustment" setting. There is one paper I use on the 1270 that doesn’t work with any Canon Media settings I’ve tried.
Let us know how your prints look in six months. As I said, Canon prints do look great coming out of the printer, but I’ve seen them fade in a few months.
Ideally, print an image for this test, keeping both the print and the file safe. Print it again in six months and compare the new print with the old one. Some Canon owners I know personally were very disappointed when they tried that. I hope the new Canon papers are better. As I said before, the problem "seems" to lie with the papers, not so much with the inks.
Yes, it is. I suspect the reason G B is asking is because there was one Canon user claiming the opposite recently, and there was no way to reason with him.
We have been using the epson 3000 and have had excellent results. Now I know this is a more expensive unit than the amount you wish to spend but we just purchased a 1520 and paid $422,00 for it. Epson says that it is built using similar parts to the 3000. The warranty people at epson said if anything goes wrong they will ship a replacement unit. Call them and make sure this is a fact. They also said that the 1520 is being discontinued but will honor the warranty for the full year. It will print 13 x 19 sheets but it will go through cartridges quickly. If you are printing 100 % color on 11 x 16 pages using 720 dpi you can expect to print only about 8 to 10 sheets before getting a warning that you will need a new color cartridge. Good luck, Bob
Not sure I posted this correctly. The epson 1520 for $422.00 is built using same parts as the 3000 which was a great machine. The 1520 will print on 13×19 papers with great results. Epson says it will replace the machine if it fails for up to a year even though it is being discontinued. The 1520 does not use large ink cartridges so it will go through a color cartridge in 8 to 10 11×16 pages with 100% color coverage. Hope this helps. Bob
I’ve yet to see any reviews (or Canon for that matter) declare the archivalness of its prints.
I’ll be researching this. I understand there is a spray you can buy to use on prints. I’ve heard some negative things about the Epson, such as leakage… then again other users have not had a problem with leakage.
You have not heard any such negative comments from those of us on this forum whose experience represents many thousands of photo quality SP2200 prints. [Of course, occasional flaws of all kinds do exist with all mass-produced hardware.]
The Canon i9900 is listed as a ‘photo’ printer. How would it work as a general printer for graphic designers? We use ‘Photoshop’, Illustrator and Freehand on the Mac platform.
Bear with me people… but I want to research this as far as I can, especially since the Canon is so much newer than the Epson… and also because everything I’ve read so far by owners of the Canon is pretty exciting.
these images are nothing short of spectacular. Better by far than the silver halide prints from Ritz, and larger, too. Worth every penny if you’re particular and shoot with fine glass. Amazing.
This printer is nothing short of spectacular. I have access to an Epson 2200 and use it often. Fantastic printer! I just purchased the i9900 this week. The color prints, in my opinion are much better than the 2200. The extra inks make the prints explode with accurate color. Resolution is incredible. The images I printed before today were shot with my D-60, I just printed a couple of images from my 1D Mark II. These are the best ink jet prints I have ever seen. I probably prefer black and white prints from the 2200 that is set up for black and white only, but I just need time to explore the i9900. I am elated with this purchase. Oh, the 19×13 prints are done and dry in less than 3 minutes.
karl l czadzeck (fremont, california United States) – See all my reviews
I did a lot of research before buying the CANON i9900.But it was worth all the time i spent.This is the best PHOTO PRINTER i have ever seen.For the money,it’s simply the best.I ran a test for color quality as soon as i had it hooked up,(witch by the way was a snap) it is fantastic, the color is as good as or better then most photolab’s.I also tested different brands of paper.the best print was the one useing CANON PHOTO PAPER PLUS GLOSSY.But the prints with other paper were not bad ,but with CANONS paper the color jump’s off the print at you.If you are into photography you will love this printer,boy i sure do.
David S Wells (Bradenton, Fl. United States) – See all my reviews
I will make this short. I was skeptical about the price but even my wife says it is sooo worth the money. Print quality is absolutely superb! 8 cartridges about 11 bucks apiece but you won’t believe how long they last (buy an extra photo magenta and photo cyan; they were the first to go). Printed some pix from the Canadian Rockies and was just blown away. Even printed 11×17 photos from my old Nikon 3megapixel camera. Unbelievable.The software that came with it was great too. Very easy to merge 3 pix into a nice panorama. If your thinking about buying it, STOP. Just do it. You won’t be sorry.
A great printer, June 18, 2004 Reviewer: An electronics fan
What a great printer. I pulled it out and read the instructions first. I had no problems installing the drivers. After running though the setup process and performing an alignment test I was ready to print. I used the high speed USB and that went without a problem. I was ready to print my first picture. I decided to use my drum scanned picture for a test. It was a 100 Megabyte TIFF file. Open the file in Photoshop and printed it to an 8×10 sheet of Canon Pro paper. The print quality was impeccable. I was amazed of the quality of print. I compared it to a LightJet print I had made from that same file. The LightJet print had a greater Dmax (deeper blacks, and from 1? away had greater visual resolution). However the LightJet 8×10 print cost me $25.00. I estimated the cost of the i9900 8.5×11 print cost me about 2 bucks and is very close in quality. Behind a glass frame and the difference is even harder to recognize. I think I?ll save my money from now on and print from the i9900 printer. The quality is truly photographic. I even made prints from 1 MB Jpeg?s that were scanned at Wal-Mart. I turned on image optimizer and was even more amazing how well it can print from such a small file. I was expecting pixilation, but that wasn?t existent. It must have interpolated the picture and with great results. Again those looked like photographs too. I used Kodak paper and Canon paper. The Kodak glossy paper was OK. It didn?t produce the same results are Canon. Canon paper was far better. I would stick to Canon paper for quality, which is why you?re looking at this printer right? If you want your own digital photo lab at home, the i9900 is for you. You will not be disappointed.
Glenn W Wallace (Redmond, WA USA)
I just printed some 13 x 19 prints on Canon Pro paper — they look like they came from a lab. I’m amazed with the quality, ease of use (their stand alone printing utility is great – my wife loves it!), quietness and speed of the unit. I had no idea it was so fast — I was after best quality I could get, and this is a step ahead of the Epson 2200 or R800, the Canon i960 etc. I was replacing an Epson Photo 1200 and until I came across this printer I had trouble finding a printer that met all of my requirements: high quality, bordless, large format, no CF slot or LCD display (printing from my file server).
Really, I cannot find any fault with this printer, setup was simple, but the proof of the pudding is in the output, and the prints are stunning, even on the mid-level "Plus" paper.
Jeffrey Corsaro (San Diego, CA) – See all my reviews
I replaced my aging, broken Epson 1270 printer with the Canon i9900. I was fairly happy with the Epson, but the i9900 is close to perfect. The quality of graphics and photos on any paper is very good, even at the standard quality setting. Full page letter sized photos print in just over a minute. The drivers work flawlessly on both my PC and Mac, with Photoshop and Illustrator. The only time the printer seems slow is when printing web pages and text with the draft settings, it is only a little faster that the standard setting, but not as fast as a few year old HP DeskJet 970 in draft mode. The ink seems to go a long way too, the Photo Cyan & Magenta ink tanks seem to be the only ones that need to be replaced. All the other colors of ink seem to last twice as long.
William S. Beller (Boynton Beach, Florida United States) – See all my reviews
I’ve come across very few products that perform up to what its manufacturer claims for them. This printer far exceeds in the quality of its output what even a blessed publicist could write about it. "Uncanny!" is the word. What the unit gives me would challenge even the best a processing lab could do.
Gil Foster (Little Rock, AR USA) – See all my reviews
I just purchased the Canon i9900 inkjet, and I just can’t restrain my enthusiasm- it’s absolutely amazing! Literally within 15 minutes of getting it all set up I had several beautiful prints, including a gorgeous 13×19 incher. I had owned a very competent, but older, Epson photo printer (870), but I really wanted something that would show off the abilities of my digital SLR (Nikon D70-love it, by the way), and this printer certainly seems to do that. Unbelievable detail, perfect color, the ability to go big, and no flaws in image quality that I can see. I am certainly not a professional photographer (amateur hobbyist), but the only excuse I have now for poor pictures will be my own lack of ability.
Until Canon themselves are willing to declare that their prints are archival if you ‘use this’ and ‘do that’ then I wouldn’t be willing to take the chance of lots of clients/patrons coming back to you two years from now and demanding their money back. Your reputation and bank account would take a serious hit.
If it doesn’t have to be archival then you may want to go with the Canon.
<< I also heard from another user this morning that the fumes are pretty bad on those sprays. >>
You need to use those sprays outside in the fresh air (but then flying grass mowings and dust may become part of the surface texture of your print) or in a vented spray booth.
Ronald, Unless these prints do prove to be archival I will only use them as client proofs, just as I have been doing with my Xerox Phaser 790… which is too expensive to repair right now or I wouldn’t be looking at a new printer…
I’ve never sold prints but if they turn out to be archival I might consider it in the future.
It all boils down to what I said at the beginning: [glossy] prints off the Canon printer look great. I don’t think you’ll find anybody saying the opposite.
Speed is also better on the Canon than on the Epson 2200.
Now, in my opinion, the matte prints on Epson archival Enhanced Matte Paper right off the Epson 2200 are the best of all, i. e. I like them better than glossy prints made by either Canon or Epson. That can be very subjective.
The short longevity of Canon papers (at least until now) is a fact. It would be really helpful to compare a 6-month old Canon print compared to a fresh print of the very same image. In my experience, it took that short a period of timer to see a substantial difference with Canon papers in the past. I would be really concerned about this until Canon and/or Wilhelm Research begin claiming archival permanence on this ink/paper/printer combination.
That and proprietary-only profiles in Source Space…has anyone ever figured this driver out on a color-management level (or are generic Canon SourceSpaces the best it can do, without custom profiles)?
It appeared to me to be an sRGB-SameAsSource workflow (unless you picked the sRGB-Sliders option)???
Based on my 1/2-day experience trying to figure this driver, and my conversation with Canon’s clueless tech support, I wouldn’t waste my time on a Canon printer.
g ballard wrote: "That and proprietary-only profiles in Source Space…has anyone ever figured this driver out on a color-management level (or are generic Canon SourceSpaces the best it can do, without custom profiles)? "
Can you explain further? Have you used the OSX driver for the i9900 or is this comment based on experience with other Canon printers (maybe it’s changed)? I’m using the OSX driver through Photoshop and although the choices are named differently than for Epson I’m not really seeing any difference in functionality. I agree that Canon seems clueless on color management of the printer, but Epson isn’t much better in my experience. However, there is definitely a much larger highly experienced user base for Epson at this point.
Small screws can bounce and roll for amazingly long distances. Look all over the room (and your clothing) for it. I once had one land inside the cuff of the leg of my slacks.
I was introduced to the Canon driver, specifically the i9x00 printer on a Windows XP box…
After reading the manual, searching the hard drive (for specific Canon profiles), Searching Canon site (unsuccessfully) for "ICC" — and speaking with a Canon support expert who never heard the term "ICC Profile" and could not find it in his support data base, and had no clue how to "SourceSpace" a specific Canon paper…
I gave up on trying to use the Canon in a color-managed workflow (PrintSpace> Specific Printer/Paper/Ink Conversion, no Canon CMS), and will leave it at that 🙂
You’re welcome. Glad you found that pesky screw. Last time I took apart the old LW II NTX, I had two screws left over. I still have them, in a ziplock bag taped to the printer, which has been running fine.
What G B just wrote about Canon support underscores the validity of what Ric Cohn posted above:
"However, there is definitely a much larger highly experienced user base for Epson at this point."
Essentially the same inks as the 2200 but in much larger cartridges, and with slots for both the Photo Black and the Matte Black ink cartridges so you don’t have to go through the hassle of swapping them when you change papers. A full set of ink cartridges for the new 4000 will set you back something like $800 (vs. $85 for the 2200). The printer itself is around US $1800. The 2200 (around $650) might be easier to pass by the dictator. 😉
I tried third party cartridges once; total disaster. Saving a bit on ink is just not worth the headache to me. I have enough difficulty getting color management and paper perfectly tweaked without worring about possible ink anomalies.
ICC profiles provided allow for the accurate translation of color data from any other compliant device into the Bubble Jet i9900’s native color space. For professional users reliant on consistent color reproduction across devices (such as scanners, monitors and printers) the ICC profile permits tremendous flexibility by ensuring the retention of color accuracy during printing, irrespective of the image source.
I’ve just written to Canon asking them about this.
I wrote to Canon this morning about color profiles. This is the response:
Dear Ms. King,
Thank you for your inquiry.
The i9900 printer does include ICC profiles. The color profiles are automatically installed on the computer when the printer driver is installed…These profiles will automatically appear in the printer driver when the sRGB color space is selected in the Adobe program.
That seems to be the problem. ICC profiles may or may not be available for the Canon printer, maybe only for sRGB images, maybe generic ones as opposed to specific ones for each combination of ink/paper/printer combo, the bottom line is Canon’s tech support is abysmal when it comes to their printers. They just don’t have a clue, and the site is useless in this respect.
I don’t want to give up until I am sure the Canon is not for me. Why am I so persistent? I guess because I have had great experience with all past Canon products… as well as my camera. I like Canon!
I’ve already said that if the longevity of your prints are not an issue, then the Canon should be your choice. It’s considerably faster than the Epson, and the glossy prints look great right off the printer.
Those prices are higher than Amazon/Adorama for a complete set. As a matter of fact, that’s what I pay per cartridge when I buy locally, from Fry’s.
The problem with the Adorama offer is that it only applies to the purchase of a "set", meaning one of each color. But you can only do that once. Some of the colors are used MUCH faster than the others. I couldn’t afford or want to buy "complete sets" every time.
We still have the LW Pro and LW Select (hard to part with them)… they both work and have never been repaired. Trouble is, I can’t hook them up to my G5. My husband uses one of them with his PC though. It still produces great B&W prints. 🙂
If they are serial printers, you can probably use them (with AppleTalk checked) through Phonenet converters and a Farralon iPrint adapter via an Ethernet router.
I have an ancient HP 1200c/PS connected to both a G4 and a G5 through a Linksys Router.
Thanks Ann… I probably should order a converter. It would be worth it to use the LaserWriter for everyday stuff… a lot cheaper than using the Xerox or an inkjet.
If you keep searching the internet Linda you’ll get a million reasons why you’re right to get the Canon. All I’m reading here from people who use printers everyday in professional fields is that the Epson is the only way to go.
You may have to face the fact that although they (Canon) make great cameras, their printer technology isn’t up to Epsons level (Epsons cameras aren’t exactly known for there high end abilities)
I’m waiting for the new Canon IP3000. It’s a cheap family printer but after my Epson C82 died and wasting my time and money with genuine Epson inks, I’ll switch to Canon.
Epson, use it or lose it, especially with Durabrite inks.
I have the old Tektronix (Xerox) Phaser560 laser. I’m sure Linda’s is a much newer and better machine. It’s a thousand bucks to replace the toner cartridges every year, but the thing is a work horse that fits the demands in this office. If I need something nice printed out I will ask Buko if he would do it for me on his epson 2200.
Sounds like the 2200 is the top printer on earth right now (not mentioning the 9600 which is the one I want.) The technician from the Apple Store that helps me keep things in ship-shape around here was very proud to tell me that he just got an epson 2200, as he said it with the sound of a voice of confidence and satisfaction like he had finally landed one.
You probably can’t go wrong with that one Linda, but it will be interesting to see what you decide on.
Truly, for me, I go to Ivey, one of our big local color houses to get print-outs that need to be presentation quality. Let someone else pay the maintenance and upkeep for a printer I would mostly keep on display.
My Xerox Phaser should be better but it seems to be a lemon. Most people with the same model are very happy with it.
I’m still not certain which printer I will go with. The 2200 has been out for a couple of years. The i9900 is newer technology.
That said… I now have some questions for those who have the 2200…
It seems I am getting a lot more photo restoration jobs. Generally I send them to Pictopia to have them printed on a textured matte stock. Do you think the 2200 is up to this task and can match the quality?
Also, how much do you charge to print an 8×10 or a 5×7?
"Do you think the 2200 is up to this task and can match the quality"- absolutely! You’ll see when you get the prints I just sent, they’re on Premium Luster Paper, should be real close. "Also, how much do you charge to print an 8×10 or a 5×7"-one or two free-bee’s aught to be part of the deal. Best guess I’ve come up with so far is that it costs me $5-7/ 13×19 in ink and paper(prem luster) per print. Some here adamantly disagree, others are with it. Enhanced mat paper will drop a buck fifty off that price. So average with matt paper is about $1 for an 8×10 or $1.20 for luster.
Thanks all you’ve given me a lot of help, as always. I may be willing to give the Canon a try this time around and if it doesnt work out I’ll go back to Epson for good.
Ashley does have a Canon and he seems to like it a lot. If I’m not mistaken he replaced his 2200 with the Canon. He also has a friend (professinal photographer) who bought the i9900 and raves about it… it also replaced the 2200 if I’m not mistaken.
It is fast, and the inks are rated at 25 years. (And remember, even these ratings assume that you’re exposing the prints to daylight- I don’t, so I’m not worried about it. )
As for color, I have a pretty good workflow set up using (basically) ballard’s standards (with custon profiles for all my cameras) and ending with "Printer Color Management" (heresy, I know) and the prints are EXACTLY spot-on. Really.
I just got so sick of Epson after buying a 2000p that I had to try the Canon. It works.
It has ALWAYS worked in Mac OS 9.2.2, and the problems that existed with the early versions of the Epson driver for OS X (from which the rumor may have originated) are fixed in the current printer driver.
Whether you want to use roll paper or not is a different matter, but that applies to ANY platform. 🙂
robb – I believe that the R800 is the winner if you only need 8.5 by 11 inch prints. I know nothing about the ink and glossy coating costs. I wish that Epson had come out with this kind of gamut on the new 4000!!!
Linda – is this called shopping on the net? Enjoy! 🙂
I too have heard raves about the R800. Epson is just very frustrating with their product cycles. A wider version seems like a no brainer, but Epson, of course, hasn’t announced any new products based on this inkset. That’s why, when I needed to replace my printer now rather than later I opted to try the i9900. I’m still very impressed, but it will take me time to fully evaluate- especially print stability.
We just got a GMG RIP installed with an Epson 9600. (ultra chrome)
With the "dot proof" RIP, it’s about 96% accurate to a Creo Spectrum contract halftone proof.
You can almost taste a market dying because the expensive contract proofing systems will all be replaced and an Epson proof will be the press target for commercial print.
Anything else is a waste of money in my book.
Epson_IS_the industry leader and the bar to reach because of it’s screening technology and ink set.
Linda – is this called shopping on the net? Enjoy!
Thanks!
I just received a couple of prints from Barry that were printed from my own files on his 2200. They are excellent prints… but it seems prudent for me to continue to wait a little longer to gather more info and also see if another printer is announced… maybe even at Photoshop World next month. Thanks very much Barry!!!
Rob, The R800 is new to me… I guess because I really do need the extra size for client proofs. But it sounds nice.
Ric, It’s great to hear your continual reports. Keep us posted if you would. Thanks!
I just made eight identical prints on my i9100. I am using Epson Premium Luster paper, and Canon inks. This is my preferred combination for nice looking prints, so this is what I am going to test. (Besides, I have hundreds upon hundreds of sheets of premium luster!)
I am going to place them in various spots:
1) In the dark, room temp 2) In the dark, in the freezer 3) In the dark, warm area 4) Full sun, outdoors 5) Full sun, indoors 6) Bright, indoors 7) Bright indoors, in a frame 8) On the dashboard of my car (By the way, the above smiley is SUPPOSED to be a number 8…. blar)
Thanks Chris! Sounds like a good plan… BTW, I didn’t know you could use Epson papers with the Canon. Do the prints look the same with the same comparable Epson paper as with Canon paper?
In fact, I have the best ever monitor-print fidelity with Epson Premium Lustre and "Printer Color Management" on my i9100.
I do use Canon’s glossy paper- I love it, but I have definitely seen fading with it on prints that get "office" levels of light on a daily basis. I have seen no such fading on prints that stay inside my portfolio.
One thing I did notice is a black and white print that I made with color inks has some nasty greenish fringing. I am not sure if it was always there and I never noticed it or if it’s a fading artifact.
I have a 2200 and was never happy with the glossy finishes. I saw some prints from an R800 and was pretty impressed. I spoke to an Epson guy on the phone who knew nothing about future releases except to say that Epson tries newer technology/inks etc., on the smaller format printers to see how things go and then if all is well, incorporate them on the wider format printers. He went on to say that the new stuff, if any, would come out Aug/Sep and that the 2200 had been out for a number of years and was due for an upgrade…
No need to wait 25 years. You can report back on a comparison of the outdoor bright sun stored print versus the indoor cool dark stored print in two weeks. Does anyone want to place a wager? 🙂
What a thread! Took me a while to read it. I too will be replacing my epson stylus 1200. Quality is still good but throwing away all the color inks just because one is low is killing me. I’m torn between the 2200 and the new 4000 which is listed at $1,700. I want to do as close to press quality as possible for proof. I do a fair amount of digital printing now on NexPress and I would like to nail down color profile for that device. 11 x 17 if not 12 x 19 (to get crops in) is essential.
I’ve ordered the i9900. The price is right, Canon is a great company, and I’ve heard glowing reports about this printer by emails being sent my way. Sorry I’m not at liberty to divulge the info right now…
Hi Larry, So far that is still up in the air although I have not heard reports of fading with the i9900. It’s still quite new so we will see. However, many are using the longer life Epson stock with the i9900 from what I understand. I’ll let you know how I like it.
Thanks Ramon… I guess after my last bad experience with a $6500 printer I feel like I should go with Canon. If it’s not as good at least it’s not as much money down the drain.
As I told you before, the prints coming off the Canon printer look great, and it’s much, much faster than the Epson 2200. I have seen poor performance on Canon paper coming off different printers, sometimes in as little as a few weeks. That’s why I always refer to the Canon papers when expressing my reservations.
I bought a Canon i9900 and like it very much. I also have Epson, so am comparing the prints. Like someone said, the Canon prints very well on Epson paper, in fact, I like the results with Epson paper much better with both printers. The Canon is quiet and fast, but it uses Photo Cyan and Photo Magenta cartridges at a pretty good pace. I buy all my ink from the manufacturer (Epson and Canon). Ink cartridges are being counterfeited in China in wholesale quantities and if you buy from a 3rd party supplier you may not be getting the real thing. It costs me a little more, but I feel better about it — poor ink will ruin a printer in a hurry. This is a most interesting thread – where will it end?
And is your Epson a 2200? Older Epson models of course should print less well than the new i9900. Even the 2200 is a bit old tech compared to the R800 and the 4000.
My Epson printers are the SP960 and the RX500. Get good results from all three printers with Epson papers. Had a big supply of Epson paper on hand so thought I might as well try it with the Canon i9900. There is a difference, very slight, in saturation with the RX500 being darker than the other two, but all are acceptable and you have to compare them with good north light to see any difference at all. I really like the Canon the best, but i think it is the paper that makes the difference.
It’s great to hear LRK that you got the i9900 do you have it already, I’m still waiting on mine. Like you said if its really is a great printer you cant go wrong with the price. How are the prints, if you have it that is. I used Illford papers on my Epson 1200 and they were always great, hope they work well with the i9900.
Come to find out mine is on backorder too. It should be here on Monday. Actually I got one overnight from PCMall last Monday… but it turned out to be a defective model and would not feed paper without jamming. After walking through all the options with tech support, they said they want to ship me a new one.
We still have the LW Pro and LW Select (hard to part with them)… they
both work and have never been repaired. Trouble is, I can’t hook them up to my G5. My husband uses one of them with his PC though. It still produces great B&W prints.
I used an asantetalk to hook my laserwriter select to my G4 laptop. Best laser printer I’ve ever owned. 10 years old and prints like a dream. Little slow since there’s barely any ram. But I print PDF these days which speeds things up.
I was leaning towards 4000 but have now tilted other way towards 2200. $$$ was deciding factor. Moving to a storefront. More rent, a new copier lease, etc. Need to trim some $$$.
Yep. I got it on ebay for about $40. You an email me directly if you have trouble w/getting asante to work. Had to mess with network settings a bit to get G4 to see asante. Took a few hours for me and my IT guy to figure out.
I got my i9900 printer today. I hooked it up and did a 4×6 print of some flowers, it was better than the one printed on my epson. Then I did a 8×10 of a coastline picture I took and ,WOW, the detail the color were great,easy to see the difference. What I’m also amazed at is how darn quiet it is when printing, along of course with the picture quality and speed. So far so great! One small question for anyone I havent done alot of big prints, but I’m going to start whats a good res. to have to make prints 13×19? Oh, also any one looking for a mint 1200 Epson photo printer , with prints like the ones the i9900 put out I dont think I need the 1200.
Hi Robb… I’m so excited about your report on the i9900. I just got mine late this afternoon. I’m in the middle of a project so I’m waiting to set it up until tomorrow. Besides I will have to pack up the first one and I’m not ready for that just yet. I’ll let you know when I get to try mine.
Yes most all new printers will out perform older models like the 1200 and the one ink cart. is a pain, but it is still a good printer holds up pretty well even today. LRK do let me know, your new one I hope will work fine. Give me the details on what you think, good or bad when its running.
Richard, Well I tried. I kept submitting bids but was still outbid by another. eBay is enough to drive you crazy… I get all shakey and giddy… not sure it’s good for me… lol…
Sometimes the printer driver gets stuck once an error is encountered. Try turning off the printer, shut down the computer, power the printer back on and restart. That should clear it up.
<< I kept submitting bids but was still outbid by another. eBay is enough to drive you crazy… I get all shakey and giddy… not sure it’s good for me… >>
I thought we went through that in "eBay 101" ?!
Inattentive student, I think!
[ Reminder: "eBay 101" lesson-content is confidential and may NOT be discussed outside the classroom walls.] !!
Thanks Robb… I may test one of my photos on a 13×19 print today… The first and only print I did on 8.5 x11 is one of the shots of the bride prior to the wedding. It’s a photo I enhanced to look more dreamy… I like it so much I want to frame it.
If anyone with a canon i9900, has done a good amount of printing let me know what the best paper to use is. For the best "everything", color, clarity, detail, etc. Not which is good or works well, but the best. Is it canon photo paper pro????????
The one drawback the Canon printer has, for the time being, is that there are no where the numbers of printers out there that Epson has. Don’t be discouraged if you only get a few replies to your last question. Hang in there.
Any update on the Canon 9900 vs Epson 2200? You new 9900 owners–have you learned anything good or bad about cost, reliability, longevity of prints, etc?
I’m close to purchasing a photo printer and am interested in these two models.
I have only used my i9900 one time… enough to know that I’m very happy with the output. I have been too busy to play and don’t want to print something that I don’t need to print. I’d be interested in hearing what others have to say though….
So far my i9900 is great Suka I started this thread and its helped me alot. A new update on the 2200 may be out this fall but I’m sure the price will be much higher than the i9900, and I dont think there could be that MUCH of a huge difference than than i9900, in terms of quality. The price of the the i9900 is good so for what one gets, even if an epson down the road does blow the i9900 away, one could always go back to an epson without my pain to their pocket.
I have printed a couple hundred 8x10s on my new i9900, enough to go through several ink cartridges. I have no complaints – I am very satisfied with the results. Now, as to archival quality, that remains to be seen.
I second Canon as a first preference (just bought an i960 today – okay I’m a lightweight) but if you decide to go with Canon, DO SPEND THE EXTRA ON AN EXTENDED WARRANTY. Canon makes awesome printers (i9900 reviews are way up in the five star range) but their printer division has also managed to distinguish itself as first rate corporate pickpockets.
The only reason I bought this i960 today was because the printhead in my 16 month old i950 took a crap on me. Replacement printheads are available only through Canon and only within the warranty period – period. Once the warranty period has passed they give you the choice of buying another Canon printer or packing sand up your ass. Nice gig.
Thanks for the advice on the extended warranty. I have an expensive Xerox 790 that just takes up room because I cannot afford to have it repaired again. It was cheaper to buy the i9900 than to have the Phaser fixed.
This is just a guesstimate, but if you use cheap paper, like Epson’s glossy photo paper, you can probably turn out an 8×10 for about 85 cents. Price depends alot on the paper – it just goes up from there. I usually use epson Premium Glossy Photo Paper or Canon’s Photo Paper Pro, which ups the cost to $1.25 or $1.50. Recently I purchased Canon’s Matte Photo Paper, which is suitable for some prints and is quite a bit cheaper than Photo Paper Pro or the Premium GPP. I don’t try to save any money on ink, because the Chinese pirates are flooding the market with well-packaged, but inferior, inks and if my pictures are any good, they deserve the best ink on the market. I buy all of my ink directly from either Canon or Epson – it may cost a little extra, but the feeling of security is worth it.
This morning I shot a cluster of tiny flower buds with my zoom lens. I brought it back and sized it at 13×19 with borderless printing enabled on my i9900. It’s so beautiful that it helped to pull me out of a slump I’ve been in all week. I too wonder my cost on a print like this. I used the Canon Photo Paper Pro PR-101. I plan to buy other quality papers in the future, such as some from Epson and other companies that have been recommended to me.
Sorry Allen, I got off the track. I figure the ink costs about 68 or 70 cents on an 8×10. I haven’t done enough 13x19s to be able to estimate how much ink they take. I think (I don’t really know) that the Epson cartridges last a little longer than the Canon cartridges – they are very close to the same price each. It is hard to judge because each picture takes a little different set of colors. I have been printing a lot of ocean pictures lately and they are "blue", whereas my garden shots are mostly "green". Anyway, my recommendation is to buy the best ink. IMO ink is almost the cheapest part of my pictures – it is the paper, frames, and all that other stuff that runs up the costs. Good pictures deserve good ink!!!!
I just printed my first 13×19 print. It was taken off a Kodak Photo pro cd at a res. of 300 and boy is it pretty good, I’m amazed at the quality. It was printed on canon photo pro paper which is easily the best for the i9900 so far. I did print an 11×14 on Illford paper last week the picture had an art filter applied to it so one can’t judge it to much, but it was very good also. I can only imagine a what a print taken with a med. format camera and drummed scanned would look like, I’ll let you all know when I try it!
I got to wondering how much the ink cost for a 13×19 and realized that all it takes is a little math. If an 8×10 (80 square inches) takes .70 worth of ink then each square inch takes .875 cents. A 13×19 print is 247 square inches and multiplied by .875 comes to a little more than $2.16 per print for ink.
Learn how to optimize Photoshop for maximum speed, troubleshoot common issues, and keep your projects organized so that you can work faster than ever before!
Related Discussion Topics
Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections
