Epson P800 or Canon Pro-1000 ?

[gurgeh]

Hello all, I think this is my first post on the print forum 

A bit of background that you can skip: I currently have an A4 photo printer and would like to be able to make larger prints. I considered an A3 printer, but I have some A2 size prints that I really like and want to be able to make similar ones by myself. If I got an A3, I fear I will have this nagging thought in the back of my head that I should’ve got something bigger. Also the price difference is not so big especially once you take ink costs into account. So I think I will go all the way and get A2 printer. I know it is not cost effective for me as I am a light user, but I do enjoy the processing and printing part of photography.

Now I am trying to decide between the main contenders: Epson P800 and Canon ImagePROGRAF Pro-1000. I cannot find many threads that do an overall comparison between the two, just some specific areas like ink cost (about the same) and paper size (Pro-1000 has strict 24” limit on length). So I have tried to summarise the various factors that can influence my decision based on reviews I have read. What do you think, do you agree with the below or do you seem some problems? Are there other differentiating factors between the two printers that I should consider? The problem is, that even after I wrote all of this, I still cannot decide which one to get. Some days I am convinced I should get the Pro-1000 and other days equally convinced I should get the P800. Maybe the answers I get here will help settle it.

1. Size/Weight:

Pro-1000: 72,3 cm x 43,3 cm x 28,5 cm 32 kg

P800: 68,4cm x 37,6 cm x 25,0 cm 19,5 kg

Big difference especially due to weight which means the P800 can be handled easily by one person, while the Pro-1000 might need two.

Advantage: P800

2. Price: Where I live the P800 is about 15% cheaper than the Pro-1000.

(Small) Advantage: P800



3. Paper handling: P800 supports roll paper. Pro-1000 does not, and is limited to 24” length which means you cannot even use the full 17” width when printing a 3:2 photo. For me I think this is not so important, because you can’t buy 17 x 25.5 paper (I guess people use roll paper for this size prints?) and I would be happy with A2 as max size. I also don’t do panoramas. One small advantage for Pro-1000 is the vacuum feed, but I don’t know how much of a difference this makes in practice.

Advantage: P800



4. Image quality: About equal. There might be a small advantage for the Pro-1000 due to extra inks and gloss optimiser. However considering that the previous generation 3880 is being used by professionals to produce excellent quality prints, and that both P800 and Pro-1000 are even better, image quality should not be a differentiating factor.

Draw



5. Ink management: Pro-1000 has separate heads for PB and MB. How big of an advantage depends on the use: for someone who does a lot of printing and is able to batch prints so that they do not switch frequently, the wasted ink on the P800 would be a small % of the total ink used so it would not make a big difference. If someone switches ink frequently, or prints low volumes the % of wasted ink is bigger.

Also, if someone only ever prints on single paper type, there would still be an advantage for the Canon, because with the Epson you would still need to periodically swap inks back and forth so that the ink on the unused line does not get stale/settled. According to some comments I have read here, the Canon always uses both blank ink types (in different ratios depending on paper type) so there is no risk an unused ink line clogging when you only use one paper type?

Advantage: Canon



6. Maintenance costs/Life Expectancy: This is a tricky one. On the plus side for the Canon, the head is user replaceable and cheaper. Also redundant nozzles should mean more it is more resistant to clogging. On the plus side for Epson, the piezo technology means the head should last longer provided it is maintained properly (i.e. used frequently). There are a lot of should’s in the previous sentences and no real evidence to back them up though, so it is anyone’s guess about how these printers will behave in reality (especially how long will Canon's head last if it is used regularly but with low volumes?). My guess is that for heavy users the Epson might be better as the thermal Canon head has a limited lifespan by design, whereas the Epson should keep going and going. For light users the Canon might be better due to Canon’s traditionally better resistance to clogging, and cheaper replacement of the head if it does clog.

Inconclusive

 

[Hugowolf]

If you are never going to print longer than A2, then go for the Canon, it has everything else in its favour.

Switching black inks is not nice. It wastes a lot of ink and is the cause of dropped nozzles when the printer ages. I just did an ink change on an Epson 9890. Longer ink lines than the P800, so lots of wasted ink. It also did two cleaning cycles after the swap, even though I have it set to no auto cleaning. More ink into the waste tank.

If you always use PK or always use MK, you can fill the other cartridge with Piezo Flush and forget about it. Even if you only switch a couple of times a year, it is a pain in the pocket.

Brian A

 

[gurgeh]

Thanks. Yes the ink switching is the big drawback of the P800. I didn't realise this could also have an effect on the nozzles, I thought it was just a matter of wasted ink and filling up the waste tank.

 

[johnami]

Your reflections are the same as mine, welcome to the club.

Having had and used an Epson A3 printer for several years without the slightest problem, my gut feeling is to continue with that brand, but I was surprised by the slight upgrade path taken by Epson from the 3880 to the P800. Then the Canon model was announced and boy what a lovely looking piece of equipment, but here in France it's around 200 euros more expensive and as you mention nearly twice the weight.....

Dilemma indeed................

A recent report I read here says that if you are only going to print gloss take the Canon but if you do need matt the Epson is better.............

The rest will be your history. The good choice will be your choice ;-)

Cheese

 

[Kumsa]

For me, it was how I weighted the factors where the printers differed--paper feed, replaceable head, paper size, swappable B/W inks. You've already noted that the print quality is equivalent. What bothered me the most on the P800 was the print head. For the Pro-1000, it was the paper size.

BreathingColor has some outstanding podcasts on printer maintenance that convinced me that my print head concern for clogging can be mitigated. I still print at least one print a week.

Next up was the swappable tanks, which is a pain with the P800. However, I don't do much matte paper. Either batch up the matte jobs for a series of printing, or replace the tank. Jon Cone has a neutral solution in his piezographic offerings which can be used (he is still polishing up his P800 fix for 3rd party inks).

It was the paper size that drew me into the P800. I'm really excited about being able to produce a panoramic size print. That's a new area for me to push my skills.

My opinion of the P800 is that it's an evolutionary progression of a mature product line. Very well thought out, well supported and is doing what I ask of it. It's a dialog, because what it prints at 17x25 brings out subtleties that require me to go back to post-processing, and has trained me to be better at my initial capture.

 

[Keith Cooper]

You have collected together some valid questions that anyone looking at a new larger printer needs to consider (for their own situation).

Having written detailed reviews of both in the last year, I often get asked similar questions, and it's difficult not to answer without it just being a list of questions (and a suggestion to read both reviews again fully). This is where I sometimes get replies that the reviews are too long

For myself, the ~24" page length limit of the Canon would be a deal breaker. Printing off one of my large pano prints on the P800 looked superb, and I'll be sure to do it again when the PRO-2000 is here.

Given that, I'd perhaps then look at 24" width options (P7000 and the PRO-4000 due to turn up here in a few weeks).

From a print quality POV there is little to choose (Slightly deeper blacks on the Epson or gloss coat on the Canon and an ink set closer to the HDX set of the P7000). Any differences need good photography, editing and print skills to show up... And then, to most people - they probably won't see it.

If you are printing from something like lightroom, then both printers can give competent results, and the key to great looking prints is user skill not printer capabilities.

Both these printers, for someone used to smaller prints, need a re-evaluation of their whole photography workflow, right from picking up the camera in the first place. I found that printing large makes me think much more about what is in my images and how they work - you really do get a different view at A2 compared to A4

 

[PaulBearer]

I have an Epson 3880 doorstop that I need to replace. I endured maddening clogs [often requiring multiple deep cleanings to clear], and now have globs of black ink deposited on every print no matter how much work I put in. I'm not a heavy user, but used to print regularly enough that clogs shouldn't have been the trouble they have been. The last time, I had shut off the printer for about 3 weeks, and came back to the clumping mess on every print, and I can't fix it myself.

On one early trip to the local Epson authorized repair shop, I saw stacks of seemingly identical larger format printers stacked all around - the manager said they were sitting there because the owners didn't want to spend the huge amounts to replace the heads when they stopped working, and left them. That was my first warning [not counting the extended cleaning I needed to perform out of the box, which resulted in half filling the waste tank in the first days of ownership].

I feel I'm in the same position with the 3880. That, coupled with constant problems with Epson drivers for the Mac, repeatedly requiring me to delete every file that had "Epson" in the file name, then re-downloading the newest driver [frequently the same as the one I had just deleted] simply because Apple had a minor operating system upgrade.

I wasn't happy that it limited paper length for panoramas, a problem that the P800 seems to fix. [By the way, you can buy 17x25 paper, which prints beautiful 16x24 images perfectly for the 2x3 ratio of the original image - from Red River as I recall] The Canon doesn't solve that problem.

So, where are we? Do I buy the Epson and pay an extra $200 for a 2 year warranty extension, or opt for the Canon [that weighs a whole lot more] and send out the occasional panorama to an outside agency? Maybe the Epson blacks are deeper, but I have no way to directly compare image quality - from my experience, unless one has both images side by side, prints from either appear outstanding, equally so, and any difference is nitpicking.

 

[Charles2]

You want to print larger. There is another reason to consider the Canon Pro-1000: the PK/MK issue, even if you print smaller one-offs now and then and like to select a particular paper for each photo. This is the first acceptable Canon I know of because the company did not impose the ridiculous large-margin requirement of its other printers.

On the other hand, a review from Australia of the Canon claims, "0.3 ml of ink passes to the maintenance cartridge with each print made."
www. [DP blocked]photoreview.com[/DP block] .au/reviews/printers/canon-imageprograf-pro-1000-printer

 

[gurgeh]

Thank you very much to everyone who took the time to reply!

It looks like for me the Canon would be the more rational choice. Paper size limitation is obviously the big drawback but I think I will be happy with A2 as max size. The jump from my current A4 to A2 will be huge, so I think I will be happy with it.

Now if only it wasn't so heavy, let's see how I will carry this beast around.

 

[Keith Cooper]

...
Now if only it wasn't so heavy, let's see how I will carry this beast around.

'You' won't be carrying it around! ... well not far.

Don't forget that if you move it, it should not be tipped off horizontal very much.

This really is not a printer for moving about. Large printers like to be set up and left in one place ;-)

 

[jogojogo]

I have owned the pro1000 for three months now after spending years with the 3880. The glossy/luster output is phenomenal...but, at a cost. I bought the Canon for glossy work, using the 3880 for fine art prints so I can state positively that the thing sucks black inks and chroma optimizer at an alarming rate.

It consumes OVER twice as much black ink as the 3880 does for the same output. It uses BOTH the matte and photo black inks at the same time, regardless of what type of paper you are using. The matte black is used at a slightly slower rate than the photo black, but it is using both blacks for all glossy/luster printing. It uses both blacks for any fine art printing. It uses both blacks for everything it prints.

It uses a CHROMA cartridge that clear coats the photos that disappears at the rate of over four per ink set. That is over $200 worth of chroma per ink set. No matter what type of paper you use, it applies chroma to it. It can't be turned off in the driver or firmware.

So...be prepared. This is one expensive printer to run. It will damned near make you cry.

Until you see a print come out of it on Ilford Smooth Gloss or Gold Fibre Silk paper that is. I've made my own profiles with a ColorMunki Photo that matches my printer to my monitor. Worth every penny.

It's hard to describe the output until you see it with your own eyes. If your prints from the 3880 are put behind glass, then they are passable next to the pro1000, but not in the same league.

Every person I've sold or given prints to from the pro1000 have all said the same thing: you did this at home????

If you can afford the price of admission, the Canon will amaze you....while you are busy hurling insults at them.

 

[Gesture]

"It consumes OVER twice as much black ink as the 3880 does for the same output. It uses BOTH the matte and photo black inks at the same time, regardless of what type of paper you are using. The matte black is used at a slightly slower rate than the photo black, but it is using both blacks for all glossy/luster printing. It uses both blacks for any fine art printing. It uses both blacks for everything it prints."

Seems like that might be advantage and the first true advance in the ridiculous do I use Matte Black or Photo Black situation we've had since the early days of advanced inkjets printing, i.e. Stylus 2200?

 

[jtoolman]

Thank you very much to everyone who took the time to reply!

It looks like for me the Canon would be the more rational choice. Paper size limitation is obviously the big drawback but I think I will be happy with A2 as max size. The jump from my current A4 to A2 will be huge, so I think I will be happy with it.

Now if only it wasn't so heavy, let's see how I will carry this beast around.

I cannot speak for the PRO1000 but definitely for the PRO-1! Same ink set?

Here is my new video where I directly compare the EPSON SC P800 with OEM inks printing on Epson Ultra Premium Luster and using the corresponding profile through Qimage.

Against the CANON Pixma PRO-1 with OEM inks Printing on EPSON Pro Luster and using the corresponding ICC profile and again through Qimage.

Besides there being almost Zero difference in Color balance and neutrality, brightness ( too light - too dark ) differences, of even the so called Deeper Black that the P800 claims, the only difference was the Gloss differential between the two printers!

Can you guess who clearly won?

Joe

 

[jogojogo]

I know it sounds absurd...the blacks are supposed to auto switch....being the main reason I bought the Canon. I got tired of the wasted ink on the 3880...and here it doesn't switch at all..it uses both all the time.

I am thinking that this may be why the photos are so striking? They are very eye catching. If Canon fixed the driver so it really did auto switch, I wonder if the photos would look as good. Just a thought.

If anyone owns this printer, try a test and do nothing but glossy or luster with it. You will see the matte black drop almost as fast as the photo black. It ain't cheap and it was hard to accept.

If anyone is thinking of buying this printer, be warned that it is expensive to operate. You will cry and moan over the ink (printer crack) but love the pictures so much..that you tell yourself that it is for the "art" that you do it.

Let me tell you...I was so upset over the ink usage, I had it ready to return it...with the box sitting on the floor by the table...and I couldn't do it. I have only myself to blame now.

It really is a love/hate thing. More love than hate, thank God.

 

[shotupdave]

if pc comes out with an ink set for this, would you use it?

 

[jogojogo]

Probably not. I've tried third party inks in a few of my printers before the 3880 and never was satisfied with them. Have you tried them?

I don't want to chance an unknown ink set and if not liking it , face the task of flushing them out to return to the OEM inks. That process really sucks...especially with twelve ink tanks to work with. I'm so picky about the output, I wouldn't be satisfied to run the ink out before going back to OEM....it would drive me nuts. This is why I've started this love/hate thing with the pro1000.

It's hard to explain until you go thru the calibration/profile stage, print on good paper, and ooh and aah over them when they come out....realizing that this formula works...the prints are damned good....and not wanting to mess with the magic.

Damned Canon......

 

[shotupdave]

i am using them in all three of my canons, from my old 9500 up to my canon pro 10. PC has matched the inks so well, that i do not have to use PC icc profiles.

 

[jogojogo]

Sounds good. I went to their web site and did not see any listing for pro1000 inks. It was a European site....is that the one you are talking about?

 

[jtoolman]

Sounds good. I went to their web site and did not see any listing for pro1000 inks. It was a European site....is that the one you are talking about?

PC is Precisioncolors.com

They only sell in North America.

The PRO-1000 will not have ANY 3rd party support for a very long time. In fact it may never happen.

Joe

 

[shotupdave]

i should have clarified my position better. the p800 will have the capacity to refill. Also the capacity to use roll paper in my opinion makes it a better choice.