Any News From Canon...

[vinke]

on a printer using pigment inks?

i know this is off topic, and there's the printer forum. but there's far more people to respond here.

my epson 1280 produces great images, but it's too slow and does not have pigment based inks.

the latest $ 500.00 printer from canon is fast enough, but no pigment inks.

 

[DavidP #28649]

on a printer using pigment inks?

i know this is off topic, and there's the printer forum. but
there's far more people to respond here.

my epson 1280 produces great images, but it's too slow and does not
have pigment based inks.

the latest $ 500.00 printer from canon is fast enough, but no
pigment inks.

--
The Lowest Paid Concert Photographer Around
http://www.neonlightsimaging.com/artshow/final.htm
Photography -- just another word for compromise

'Since we can't keep crime in check, why don't we legalize it and tax it out of business?' -- Will Rogers

 

[Phillips40]

After all, Epson has a MUCH wider variety of compatible papers for pigmented inks anyway. I could see how a Canon might be faster, but what's worth waiting for is worth waiting for (a 13x19 on my 2000P takes about 40 minutes!)
--
My bug gallery: http://www.frankphillips.com/macro
Wondering about the MP-E lens? Read my MP-E review at
http://www.vividlight.com/articles/2914.htm

on a printer using pigment inks?

i know this is off topic, and there's the printer forum. but
there's far more people to respond here.

my epson 1280 produces great images, but it's too slow and does not
have pigment based inks.

the latest $ 500.00 printer from canon is fast enough, but no
pigment inks.

 

[vinke]

thanks, but i'm looking for the speed of canon and pigment inks by epson.

on a printer using pigment inks?

i know this is off topic, and there's the printer forum. but
there's far more people to respond here.

my epson 1280 produces great images, but it's too slow and does not
have pigment based inks.

the latest $ 500.00 printer from canon is fast enough, but no
pigment inks.

--
The Lowest Paid Concert Photographer Around
http://www.neonlightsimaging.com/artshow/final.htm
Photography -- just another word for compromise

'Since we can't keep crime in check, why don't we legalize it and
tax it out of business?' -- Will Rogers

 

[vinke]

After all, Epson has a MUCH wider variety of compatible papers for
pigmented inks anyway. I could see how a Canon might be faster,
but what's worth waiting for is worth waiting for (a 13x19 on my
2000P takes about 40 minutes!)

re: compatible papers -- are you suggesting that most photo papers will not work using canon printer, or just that they are not rated/recommended? for example, epson does not recommend enhanced matte or water color papers for the 1280...but i use them any way, and they look great.

re: 40 minutes -- that's too long to wait, and disrupts work flow. speed is important to me. everything comes to a hault when I'm waiting 35 - 40 minutes for my 13x19 to finish. heaven forbid i need two!!

michael reichmann had a good observations some time ago re: the canon s9000. Namely: Speed was over 8 times faster than epson 1270 and image quality was the same as epson 1280. only problem....no pigment inks.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/s9000.shtml

so for now, i guess that i'm out of luck.

Since I didn't have a 2880 PPI Epson 1280 printer available for comparison I also used my Epson 5500, which is a 2880 PPI resolution printer. It took exactly the same amount of time; just under 10 minutes to print this "Letter" sized test file."

--
My bug gallery: http://www.frankphillips.com/macro
Wondering about the MP-E lens? Read my MP-E review at
http://www.vividlight.com/articles/2914.htm

on a printer using pigment inks?

i know this is off topic, and there's the printer forum. but
there's far more people to respond here.

my epson 1280 produces great images, but it's too slow and does not
have pigment based inks.

the latest $ 500.00 printer from canon is fast enough, but no
pigment inks.

 

[Brian Cao]

After all, Epson has a MUCH wider variety of compatible papers for
pigmented inks anyway. I could see how a Canon might be faster,
but what's worth waiting for is worth waiting for (a 13x19 on my
2000P takes about 40 minutes!)

I have no idea where you're getting your information but that is completely flat out WRONG. A pigment ink printer will never have the compatibility of a dye based printer be it from Canon or Epson. The 2200 has horrible compatibility with all high glossy papers for example.

 

[Diane B]

After all, Epson has a MUCH wider variety of compatible papers for
pigmented inks anyway. I could see how a Canon might be faster,
but what's worth waiting for is worth waiting for (a 13x19 on my
2000P takes about 40 minutes!)

re: compatible papers -- are you suggesting that most photo papers
will not work using canon printer, or just that they are not
rated/recommended? for example, epson does not recommend enhanced
matte or water color papers for the 1280...but i use them any way,
and they look great.

and there are a number of papers you can't use with pigmented ink/printer that you can use with the dye based inks. However, the papers available (and there are a lot--including a LOT of 3rd party--for instance, the absolutely wonderful Hahnemuhle Photo Rag) are way more than adequate.
--
Diane B
http://www.pbase.com/picnic/galleries
B/W lover, but color is seducing me

 

[Diane B]

After all, Epson has a MUCH wider variety of compatible papers for
pigmented inks anyway. I could see how a Canon might be faster,
but what's worth waiting for is worth waiting for (a 13x19 on my
2000P takes about 40 minutes!)

I have no idea where you're getting your information but that is
completely flat out WRONG. A pigment ink printer will never have
the compatibility of a dye based printer be it from Canon or Epson.
The 2200 has horrible compatibility with all high glossy papers for
example.

I suspect most people using pigmented ink printers are not as much interested in high gloss papers--and more to semi gloss and matte/fine art (and longevity)--but could be wrong. If you want to print with high gloss--then buy the well priced 1280--which I also own but rarely use now.
--
Diane B
http://www.pbase.com/picnic/galleries
B/W lover, but color is seducing me

 

[Phillips40]

...or maybe I should have rephrased what I said. What I meant was that Epson makes a much wider range of paper/printer combinations than Canon. I did NOT mean that you can use incompatible paper.

Also, the next time you take issue with someone's statement, a little bit of "gentility" might be called for...perhaps ask for an explanation instead of using the word "wrong" in all caps.
--
My bug gallery: http://www.frankphillips.com/macro
Wondering about the MP-E lens? Read my MP-E review at
http://www.vividlight.com/articles/2914.htm

After all, Epson has a MUCH wider variety of compatible papers for
pigmented inks anyway. I could see how a Canon might be faster,
but what's worth waiting for is worth waiting for (a 13x19 on my
2000P takes about 40 minutes!)

I have no idea where you're getting your information but that is
completely flat out WRONG. A pigment ink printer will never have
the compatibility of a dye based printer be it from Canon or Epson.
The 2200 has horrible compatibility with all high glossy papers for
example.

 

[vinke]

i never use glossy paper. only matte and art papers.

After all, Epson has a MUCH wider variety of compatible papers for
pigmented inks anyway. I could see how a Canon might be faster,
but what's worth waiting for is worth waiting for (a 13x19 on my
2000P takes about 40 minutes!)

I have no idea where you're getting your information but that is
completely flat out WRONG. A pigment ink printer will never have
the compatibility of a dye based printer be it from Canon or Epson.
The 2200 has horrible compatibility with all high glossy papers for
example.

 

[Adam2]

Many 3rd parties have been working on this including John Cone and MIS. Originally, Cone said that he would have them out sometime in May (if I remember correctly), but obviously there have been some problems. We'll just have to wait and see(the).

on a printer using pigment inks?

i know this is off topic, and there's the printer forum. but
there's far more people to respond here.

my epson 1280 produces great images, but it's too slow and does not
have pigment based inks.

the latest $ 500.00 printer from canon is fast enough, but no
pigment inks.

 

[Brian Cao]

Sorry I was a bit strong, but I hear something like this a little far too often and wanted to be sure of clarification. The way you were wording it implied the 2200 had a much better paper compatibility [across all brands] then does the S9000 or any dye based printer, which is not true.

To respond to other posters, regardless of whether we count glossy papers or not, pigment based inks have less compatibility then dye based printers. It's a characteristic of the ink, not the printer.

The reason to get the 2200 is for superior print life, not for superior quality or compatibility.

After all, Epson has a MUCH wider variety of compatible papers for
pigmented inks anyway. I could see how a Canon might be faster,
but what's worth waiting for is worth waiting for (a 13x19 on my
2000P takes about 40 minutes!)

I have no idea where you're getting your information but that is
completely flat out WRONG. A pigment ink printer will never have
the compatibility of a dye based printer be it from Canon or Epson.
The 2200 has horrible compatibility with all high glossy papers for
example.

 

[Phillips40]

There's one thing for sure, as you said: the dye-based printers can almost always beat pigment based printers in print quality. My $120 Canon 850 prints look much better than my Epson 2000P prints. The reason for archival (pigment) inks is purely for longevity, not for quality.
--
My bug gallery: http://www.frankphillips.com/macro
Wondering about the MP-E lens? Read my MP-E review at
http://www.vividlight.com/articles/2914.htm

The reason to get the 2200 is for superior print life, not for
superior quality or compatibility.