Harris Newman
Well-known member
What would be a good printer to match up with a F717?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Lets talk printers
- Thread starter Harris Newman
- Start date
Laurence Matson
Forum Pro
Epson 2100/2200: nothing to touch it in the reasonably priced range.
And now for a word from our Canon users:
BANNED Mr. Stacey
Senior Member
Canon S9000 with WeInk Continuous Re-Inking system.
http://www.WeInk.com
--
[email protected]
The above pictures are not Mr. Stacey.
F707, s85, s75
Olympus 340, Nikon 800, Kyocera S3, Canon S200
http://www.WeInk.com
--
[email protected]
The above pictures are not Mr. Stacey.
F707, s85, s75
Olympus 340, Nikon 800, Kyocera S3, Canon S200
Gar108
Well-known member
I have heard that the 717 is not Print Image Matching (PIM) compatible. The Epson 2200 uses only PIM and not the industry standard EXIF 2.2 which the Canon S9000 uses. The Sony 707 was PIM compatible. It would seem that the Canon S9000 is probably the best bet for better color and sparpness reproduction. I would also like to hear some feedback on whether the Epson printers can produce accurate color and sharpness from the 717. I would prefer Epson over the Canon, but my main interest is accurate photos.
Gar
Gar
Laurence Matson
Forum Pro
I pretty much rely on my own matching using monitor calibration, PS profile, and something like test strips. All very primitive by today's standards, but the results on the Epson 2100 are excellent.
santa
Senior Member
My 2200 prints are fantastic. I'd prefer the speed of the Canon, but the 2200 uses pigment inks that will last much, much longer. I prefer admitting to some metamerism up front, which is only an issue when viewing a picture at an extreme angle, to admitting that the picture will possibly fade within a few years. I am doing 13x19 prints, borderless on a regular basis. Currently I'm still awaiting my 717 but I've gone so far as to download 717 shots from the net to print 13x19 just to see...and they have been outstanding. It all depends on your needs. If you need fast proofs that don't require long life the Canon would be the ticket. If you want to sell prints that need to last for 20 years, the Epson is the only way to go. It's going to make my xmas gift giving much easier this year, assuming Rudolf remains in good health. 
David Fey
Well-known member
Well the printers section had an informal but nice review of printers today, and none of them were particularly ahead of the rest.
Epson 2200 seemed ultimately the best
for me this is too slow and the color is apparently rather flat and sedate, which most may love but I like colors that are a bit more vivid than real life. Its a style thing. But the speed stinks and I'm not selling my prints which would make another vote for this one.
Canon 9000
got a lot of favorable thoughts in terms of quality, but it has banding sometimes only micro banding, but banding issues. They are horrid to track down and remove if they can be removed at all. Fast isn't any good if it isn't done right and I'm not convinced that its done right
HP 7550
got ok results, no banding but less quality than either of the above. And the price was far cheaper ultimately both in initial as well as continuous cost. I'm usually an HP fan, but not convinced this product does what it should yet.
So my vote is to send them out to be printed till a product convinces me its the way to go. The epsons I've had have been slow and noisy and prone to clogs, but good output. I'd rather wait till I'm convinced Canon or HP has done a better job, or more results come in
My $.20 (inflation)
Epson 2200 seemed ultimately the best
for me this is too slow and the color is apparently rather flat and sedate, which most may love but I like colors that are a bit more vivid than real life. Its a style thing. But the speed stinks and I'm not selling my prints which would make another vote for this one.
Canon 9000
got a lot of favorable thoughts in terms of quality, but it has banding sometimes only micro banding, but banding issues. They are horrid to track down and remove if they can be removed at all. Fast isn't any good if it isn't done right and I'm not convinced that its done right
HP 7550
got ok results, no banding but less quality than either of the above. And the price was far cheaper ultimately both in initial as well as continuous cost. I'm usually an HP fan, but not convinced this product does what it should yet.
So my vote is to send them out to be printed till a product convinces me its the way to go. The epsons I've had have been slow and noisy and prone to clogs, but good output. I'd rather wait till I'm convinced Canon or HP has done a better job, or more results come in
My $.20 (inflation)
Sharon102827
Forum Enthusiast
Having participated in actual scientific print quality testing on the above printer I am surprised by the result you got. Quite frankly the HP won over both Cannon and Epson in worldwide test except in Japan where it was edged out by Epson.
By the way the new HP 5550 is a cheap way to get exactly the same engine as is in the 7550. If you do not need the ability to insert memory cards.
Sharon
JohnK
Veteran Member
Epson stylus photo EX, or stylus photo 1200 or stylus photo 1270 or stylus photo 1280, wide selection of papers, big prints, real nice.
JohnK
--
JohnK
DigitalDisbeliever
Active member
I have had my Canon S9000 for over 6 months and printed everything from brochures to stickers to 11x17 photographs. I have not had a single printing problem nor do I expect any. I have owned many different printers. Epsons, Alps and HP and none of them come close the Canon. That is just my personal experience.
wildbill
Leading Member
Pixel Brat
Leading Member
I love it. I love the separate ink cartridges too. Less waste. Great printer.
--
Amy
http://www.AmyStuff.com
My website on digital photography, digital
gadgets, and various digital accessories.
--
Amy
http://www.AmyStuff.com
My website on digital photography, digital
gadgets, and various digital accessories.
Mike Mullenix
Active member
Epson has a $100 rebate on the great 1280 stylus photo . I found one today for only $360 . It will do 13X44 prints.
IronMan43
Well-known member
S Scott
Well-known member
--
I have an F707 and the Epson 2200. I did alot of research and payed close attention to the debates in the Printers forum. I read more negative comments about the Canon and HP solutions than that of the Epson. The major complaint was the price! I paid the extra for the 2200 and do not regret it for one moment. I generally do not use PIM anyway with PS and Qimage Pro for printing I have had fantastic 11x17 prints in both color and B/W. No other injet, that I have read about or seen, can match the B/W printing. Just my opinion for what it is worth.
An Epson 2200 lover,
Steve
http://www.scottlan.com
Harvey F
Forum Pro
Hi
I have been using a S9000 for five months now and it is a solid printer. I have had no clogging problems and it prints beautiful pictures time after time. I use my HP OfficeJet G85 for faxing, copying, scanning and printing text. It is a great workhorse, but for printing pictures the S9000 IMHO is the best. I have had no problems with it and it has printed nice pictures right out of the box from day one.
I would highly recommed it.
Harvey F
I have been using a S9000 for five months now and it is a solid printer. I have had no clogging problems and it prints beautiful pictures time after time. I use my HP OfficeJet G85 for faxing, copying, scanning and printing text. It is a great workhorse, but for printing pictures the S9000 IMHO is the best. I have had no problems with it and it has printed nice pictures right out of the box from day one.
I would highly recommed it.
Harvey F
probepro
Senior Member
I'm in the market for a printer too, and have spent a lot of time in the printer talk forum and reading reviews. Here's a summary of some key features (your mileage may vary):
B&W prints: 2200 by a wide margin
Color prints: too close to call
Speed: 9000 is much faster
Paper selection: 2200 by far, including paper rolls
Print longevity: 2220, possibly by a wide margin
Clogging: 9000, especially if only used occasionally
Quietness: 9000 by far
Printer cost: 9000 by far
Supplies cost: 9000
Availability: 9000, 2200 is on back order just about everywhere
Form what I have read, both are excellent printers, although there are issues with both. Since I expect to do a lot of B&W printing, the Epson 2200 was an easy choice for me. But had it not been for that, I would have opted for the Canon 9000.
Chuck
probepro
Senior Member
--
Mike, I don't know if you bought the 1280 or not, and it is a fine printer, but IMHO for less than $100 more, the newer technlology, cheaper operation, and print quality of the Canon 9000 is a better value.
Chuck
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum