-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
24" printer. Canon iPF6400 v new Epson SC-P7000
- Thread starter dbbarron
- Start date
Msongs
Leading Member
the epson sc p7000 is a 44 inch printer and the canon 6400 is only 24 inch. they are not really the same at all.
The P7000 is a 24" printer, you must be thinking of the P9000, which is a 44" printer.
Brian A
Msongs
Leading Member
[No message]
Loading…
www.epson.com
The P7000 still uses that awful PK <>MK switching. Plenty of ink and time wasted.
They should have done away with that and used dedicated black ink tanks for both, like the Canon does.
soloryb
The strange thing is they have produced printers that didn't require a a PK/MK switch, the Epson Pro 4000 for example.
Brian A
Dan Vincent
Leading Member
The ink-switching is mildly irritating, it is not the same as, say, using an Epson 7800 or 9800 where you had to flush the lines and spend an obscene amount of ink. Making a PK > MK change uses up 1.5ish mL of MK in the change and takes about two minutes, while going back to PK uses about 3 mL of PK. there is also an economizer setting which uses less PK when switching. It only cleans the active channel in the head, not the actual ink delivery lines.
While having a dedicated MK channel would be helpful, the 6/7/8/9000 series are like the x900 and x890 series in that they have dedicated lines and ink tank stations for PK and MK.
I don't know anything about that economizer setting, but according to Epson's posted specs a switch from PK to MK and back to PK uses a lot of matte black. Do that enough times and you would use up an entire MK tank. That's besides the PITA, time and potential flow/clog problems due to switching blacks. Epson could have solved this by using dedicated black tanks.
soloryb
If they already have this capability in a Po 4000, I wonder what their thinking was in continuing to use that switching technology instead of dedicated blacks. Perhaps it's the extra production costs? If so, I'd call that penny wise and pound foolish.
I've gotten so used to never thinking about switching using the ipf6400 that I don't think I would ever go back.
soloryb
Dan Vincent
Leading Member
My numbers were based on my memory of the Epson 7900 (a machine I often used), and indeed are backed up by Epson (see the link). I was off by only a few tenths of a mil. These costs are, IMO, acceptable to most people if they are batching their jobs. Compared to its predecessor, this was a massive improvement.
I don't know anything about that economizer setting, but according to Epson's posted specs a switch from PK to MK and back to PK uses a lot of matte black. Do that enough times and you would use up an entire MK tank. That's besides the PITA, time and potential flow/clog problems due to switching blacks. Epson could have solved this by using dedicated black tanks.
soloryb
Loading…
www.epson.com
They do use separate tanks and lines; what you want is separate channels in the head. The machines always have PK and MK loaded at all times, otherwise you would have to flush the lines to switch ink (like in the x600 and x800 series) and that would cost a massive amount of ink. We're not talking a few mL here, we're talking DOZENS of mL back in the day. I'm not sure why the P-series uses so much more PK when switching between blacks; this may have something to do with the reformulation of the blacks to give better black density when using MK paper. I checked my P7000 and unfortunately the economizer setting is gone; I remember using this on both my 7900 and 3880 to reduce the cost of ink switching (at the potential risk of some less density on those initial photo black prints after the switch).
As to why Epson doesn't have a separate channel in the head dedicated to MK, my guess is that they determined that most customers do not switch media types very often, and the cost of having an additional, rarely used channel in the piezo head was deemed inappropriate. Especially when infrequent usage would clog the head; you would spend more money cleaning that channel in ink than you would spend making the occasional MK to PK change.
Canon's head design is different and has a different cost and maintenance structure, which gives them one competitive advantage in that they can include this head.
--
dvincent
Boston Area Photographer Specializing in Aviation and Business Jets
www.dvincentphotography.com
I used tanks where I meant dedicated nozzles. In any event, this thread is about the new SC P7000, and that switching uses a heck of a lot of ink.My numbers were based on my memory of the Epson 7900 (a machine I often used), and indeed are backed up by Epson (see the link). I was off by only a few tenths of a mil. These costs are, IMO, acceptable to most people if they are batching their jobs. Compared to its predecessor, this was a massive improvement.
I don't know anything about that economizer setting, but according to Epson's posted specs a switch from PK to MK and back to PK uses a lot of matte black. Do that enough times and you would use up an entire MK tank. That's besides the PITA, time and potential flow/clog problems due to switching blacks. Epson could have solved this by using dedicated black tanks.
soloryb
https://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store...d=63079721&foid=125865&cat=53470&subcat=53472
They do use separate tanks and lines; what you want is separate channels in the head. The machines always have PK and MK loaded at all times, otherwise you would have to flush the lines to switch ink (like in the x600 and x800 series) and that would cost a massive amount of ink. We're not talking a few mL here, we're talking DOZENS of mL back in the day. I'm not sure why the P-series uses so much more PK when switching between blacks; this may have something to do with the reformulation of the blacks to give better black density when using MK paper. I checked my P7000 and unfortunately the economizer setting is gone; I remember using this on both my 7900 and 3880 to reduce the cost of ink switching (at the potential risk of some less density on those initial photo black prints after the switch).
As to why Epson doesn't have a separate channel in the head dedicated to MK, my guess is that they determined that most customers do not switch media types very often, and the cost of having an additional, rarely used channel in the piezo head was deemed inappropriate. Especially when infrequent usage would clog the head; you would spend more money cleaning that channel in ink than you would spend making the occasional MK to PK change.
Canon's head design is different and has a different cost and maintenance structure, which gives them one competitive advantage in that they can include this head.
--
http://www.dvincentphotography.com
I use mostly MK, but I do use PK once or twice per month, and even that useage would add up if I had to switch blacks each time. As far as people who only use one or the other black almost exclusively, I agree this can cause the little used channels to clog. I run weekly QImage Print Unclog Pattern as well as a service mode (nozzle1) check weekly, just to guard against such clogging. Whenever I see more than a few nozzles clogged on my ipf6400, I do a Type A head cleaning - which uses up relatively little ink. That does not occur very often for me, but I can imagine it becoming a problem for someone who just about never switches blacks. And yes, Canon has that competitive advantage you refer to.
soloryb
Dan Vincent
Leading Member
The situation is actually much worse on an Epson piezo head if the channel goes south, because the entire head must be replaced and this is a non-trivial, expensive task. If you never printed MK, you'd be literally flushing ink down the maintenance tank and the printer will not run without an MK installed. It'd be a massive waste of ink for a large part of Epson's market (commercial proofing, wide format signs, etc) that never touches MK. In this scenario, the current setup saves money and maintenance hassles. The cost of replacing a head far outweighs some occasional ink spent in a transfer.
The calculus will be different for everybody but unless you're switching MK and PK every day it's probably an OK compromise, and truthfully if you have a need for doing that you're probably using a Canon already (or own a second device for matte throughput). This is a flaw for sure, but when the x900 series came out this method was universally hailed in comparison to the old method and seen as a fair compromise. I can understand why they're in no rush to change it even though it is not as user friendly as it should be.
Epson's got bigger problems, like the fact that the ten ink heads clogged like an allergy sufferer. Hopefully the new P series printers solved that problem... though I doubt it.
I can see where it makes economic sense for Epson to do this for the commercial market. What does that say to folks like me who do use both blacks? Not a good message.
BTW, printing that QImage Unclog Printer test pattern uses both blacks, and I do that weekly besides my regular PK-MK printing habits.
I switched last year to Canon (ipf6400) from an Epson 3880, which as you may suspect had lots of clogging issues - particularly in the black nozzles. I too hope that Epson figures out a good solution to the black switching issue. At least Canon has seen the light and tries to address that issue - even if it's not a perfect solution for black ink non-switchers as you have pointed out.
soloryb
Dan Vincent
Leading Member
Unfortunately, it's the nature of the business. These devices have compromises, some of them livable, others not, depending on your workload. Canon's tech lends them well for the fine end photographic market as well as one-off wide format work, while Epson can do both photographic and is quite popular in the commercial proofing world.
On a Canon I can see that as quite important, since you have to maintain that line regularly. On an Epson, there isn't a risk of an ink change clogging the line, but there is a risk of pigment sedimentation. Even if you never switch MK and PK, the printers are timed to switch once every six months to make sure the MK line is properly pressurized and transferring ink when switched. If you were using an epson regularly, there really is no need to switch PK/MK for maintenance purposes more than that. Since they share the same black channel, cleaning with PK is the same as cleaning with MK. The act of switching the inks provides the cleaning exercise.
For your needs, the Canon is absolutely the right choice.
Indeed. The flipside of the coin is that someone who never prints MK on a Canon printer will be wasting ink. Ultimately, the market is big enough to allow for two different approaches, so no one should be begrudged for buying the device that works for them. Truthfully, the only real solution for people using that may be to give up something else in return, because I do not see Epson making a dedicated MK channel in their heads. For example, allow the loading of MK in place of O or G and disable the left over channel, essentially making it an extra-headed P6/8000.
They cheaped out on the commercial edition, for example: The new violet ink is in place of LLK. I recently set up a P-7000 commercial edition and I'm in the process of creating example files for both editions of the printer to demonstrate the pro/cons of going that route. Photographers will want to avoid the commercial edition at all costs unless they print a lot of purple, because the lack of LLK will affect banding performance. You gain in gamut, but lose in dynamic range, basically.
hjulenissen
Veteran Member
If you switch back and forth between glossy and matte a lot compared to how much you print of each type, then yes, it is wasteful and time-consuming.
If you print mostly either glossy or matte (or you print a series of either between swapping), then the problem is not large.
Look at it the other way: If they were able to fit a maximum of N cartridges in the head/delivery system, would you not be interested in having N+1 distinct inks, even if that meant a possible cludge?
I'd be interested in having N pigment inks and N dye inks in my 3880, even if that meant having to (automagically) flush the system to re-use the N-channel ink delivery system.
-h
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum