Which printer to buy?

[TZZDC26562]

Yeah I finally did that and asked them for prints

 

[TZZDC26562]

thats true 1200x1200DPI should be 40% more then 1440x720DPI but I've seen a sample of the 870 Epson and I AM SHOCKED at the quality of the print I mean no visible dots and the color on matte paper is outstanding.

I would rate the Epson 870 a 9/10 for the clarity but I would of given it a 10/10 but the orange shift problem bumps it down a notch

I'm finding a replacement printer to my HP 932C Yes it will be used for photos occasionally but more for text.

 

[Ron S.]

Amal,
I work at the Las Vegas Convention Center and get to attend all the
major trade shows like Comdex, Consumer Electronics, PMA ect...

and so on.....

Amal,

You would be well served to ignore the brand bashing, brand loyalty posturing, and anecdotal narratives that questions of this type invariably generate, and follow the excellent unbiased sensible advice posted by Dale in the first response to your inquiry in this thread. This type of information from a photography professional is priceless in making a truly informed decision.

Regards,

Ron S.

 

[TZZDC26562]

I'm pretty unbiased when it comes to anything as long as I get the truth then thats all that matters.

Honestly you're better off going to a store and asking to sample the printers right there on the spot and letting your eyes see only what you want to see.

 

[Michael McNight]

Ron,

I'm not "brand bashing" just calling it the way I see it! Even though I've been doing digital photograpy professionally for 4 years now, you don't need to be a professional to SEE the results that hung on my walls!

HP & Canon prints fade very fast when exposed to constant fluorescent light! No hype, FACT!

Mike

 

[dannyjl]

Does the F870 support both parallel and USB connections,
or just USB only? Since I can't read Japanese I can't tell
from the Canon press announcement. Thanks for any info!

I have the brochure right here and it does state parallel support.
danny

I forgot to mention last week when talking about the new Epson 900
that Cannon also introduced a new killer printer, the 870. The demo
prints I've seen are outstanding. The printer is 2400 x 1200 dpi
and Cannon claims a 20 yr. lifespan for prints made on their pricey
pro paper. Looks great but I'm still leaning towards the Epson with
its wide range of papers.
danny

No man, this is the scene in Japan and I'm sure the 870 will come
out with a different number as usual when it is released in the
states. The Cannon paper in Japan is about 30% moe expensive than
Epson's top quality stuff. I'd stay away form the Konica. My prints
faded after about 6 months.

 

[Ron S.]

Ron,
I'm not "brand bashing" just calling it the way I see it! Even
though I've been doing digital photograpy professionally for 4
years now, you don't need to be a professional to SEE the results
that hung on my walls!

HP & Canon prints fade very fast when exposed to constant
fluorescent light! No hype, FACT!

Mike

Sorry Mike, perhaps what you stated in your post was not brand bashing in its purest form, but I would call it anecdotal reporting at best. I have to disagree with your "FACT(s)" on a couple of points...

1. You are correct in that the manufacturer is likely to optimize the prints to demonstrate the printers abilities. This is not the same as optimizing for lightfastness, and in fact may impair lightfastness at the cost of more impressive immediate short term results (which may very well be desireable at a trade show).

2. Resistance to fading is very much a property of the paper used as it is of the inkset in any printer. You provided no information on this important variable, which could certainly alter the results you observed.

3. Your statement about the very fine Epson 1270 printer is quite inaccurate. Even Wilhelm Imaging Research (whose reputation has been much maligned by the color shift problems with the 870/1270 printers) now admits that there is a serious problem with longevity of these prints (whether from light exposure or other environment elements), and are in the process of undergoing a major change in their testing procedures to help insure that an embarassment like the 870/1270 debacle does not occur again. (new procedures now to be released on Nov. 29)

If I knew nothing about inkjet printing except what you provided in your original post, I would have to conclude that all HP and Canon photos quickly fade away, that older Epson prints show no perceivable fading, and that photos from the newer Epson 1270 will last even longer?! I don't think so.... even Epson won't make that claim again anytime soon.

I'm not trying to dispute your experience with these issues; just that there are too many variables that you haven't addressed in what is actually a very small sample of photos, regarding a very complicated subject. You have opened an issue, that of achival quality, which is a "work in progress" for inkjet printing in general and a complete science unto itself. I think it is unfair as well as untruthful to dismiss an entire manufacturers group of products as uniformly inferior (either directly or by implication) with respect to a singular parameter based on a small, anecdotal sample, while promoting the attributes of another product regarding this parameter, which have since been well documented as false, by both that products manufacturer (Epson buyback program) as well as the independent testing labortory (WIR) involved in that products development.

The primary reason I responded to your post is that I had been very pleased to see a potentially volitile thread progress with relatively solid, balanced information exchange without degenerating into another "printer war" fiasco. I read your report as an attempt to start the brand warfare again. Please accept my apology if I misinterpreted your intention.

Regards,

Ron S.

 

[Michael McNight]

Ron,

I never represented my little test as science or done with laboratory standards. Plain-n-simple. I got inkjet prints straight from the manufacture's booths. Printed on their paper, glossy, except the canon which was on glossy film. Using their inks. And hung-em on my walls under fluorescent lighting and gave up the results. End story. Call it anecdotal if you like, I'm not offended, it's just the facts.

And sure there is some question about Epson print longevity. Maybe it's not 12 years, perhaps it's only half that, 6 years. But it would still be 5.5 years longer than the Canon and HP prints hanging on my walls!

Sorry, I missed the brand-wars of which you refer, again it was not my intent to restart-em.

Tomorrow I'll return to Comdex and collect a fresh batch of print samples from the latest printers and start this, un-scientific "real-world" test, over.

Mike

 

[Ron S.]

Mike wrote:
......

...And sure there is some question about Epson print longevity. Maybe
it's not 12 years, perhaps it's only half that, 6 years. But it
would still be 5.5 years longer than the Canon and HP prints
hanging on my walls! .......it's just the facts

Mike,

It would be if it were true. Unfortunately, it's not 6 years either. The Epson orange shift problem is showing up as soon as 24 hours after printing in some environments using the Premium Gloss paper, which has since been pulled from the market to assist in damage control. Documented by Epson, WIR and many others. As you say, just the facts.

Ron S.

 

[Michael McNight]

Ron,

I just left the WIR site and must have missed the "24hour" statement, can you direct me to where it is? (link?) Tomorrow I'll see what the Epson reps have to say about it at COMDEX. And get, first-hand, the facts.

I also just left the Epson site and they do in fact still sell the Premium Glossy paper, here's the link, http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/ProductMediaSpec.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@1040965805.0974353457@@@@&BV_EngineID=jaljgcdemjkbfdlcfjgckicnf.0&Zoom=Big&oid=-8200

I don't know where you get this stuff!

Mike

It would be if it were true. Unfortunately, it's not 6 years
either. The Epson orange shift problem is showing up as soon as 24
hours after printing in some environments using the Premium Gloss
paper, which has since been pulled from the market to assist in
damage control. Documented by Epson, WIR and many others. As you
say, just the facts.

Ron S.

 

[dgrogers]

That paper was released a very short time ago and is different from the origional, the origional premium glossy paper was pulled off the shelf months ago. I doubt you'll get the whole truth from the sales people at Comdex. The fading is well documented over the internet, and in some cases started a few hours after the print was created. All papers suffered to some degree. Check out the 870 review at Steves-Digicams.com for more information.

I also just left the Epson site and they do in fact still sell the
Premium Glossy paper, here's the link,

http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/ProductMediaSpec.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@1040965805.0974353457@@@@&BV_EngineID=jaljgcdemjkbfdlcfjgckicnf.0&Zoom=Big&oid=-8200

I don't know where you get this stuff!

Mike

It would be if it were true. Unfortunately, it's not 6 years
either. The Epson orange shift problem is showing up as soon as 24
hours after printing in some environments using the Premium Gloss
paper, which has since been pulled from the market to assist in
damage control. Documented by Epson, WIR and many others. As you
say, just the facts.

Ron S.

 

[Ron S.]

Mike,

Surely you have heard of the Epson orange shift problem, and read some of the multitude of complaints on this forum alone. If you do a simple search, you'll find more links and an entire weeks worth of material to read. You can also try http://www.p-o-v-image.com/epson/ as a place to follow the event timeline of this "situation". The 24 hour statement is from an interview with Henry Wilhelm where he acknowledged the possibility of this occurance under certain environmental conditions which were not then part of their testing procedure. It is not on the WIR website, where although this issue is acknowledged, it is understated, to say the least. The earliest occurances I have been made aware of personally were within one week.... seven days. You shouldn't have to wait to talk to Epson reps at a marketing convention... Epson will readily acknowledge this problem by telephone, and will even buy your printer back if you want them to. Also, if you search again on this very forum, you'll find all the info on the Premium Glossy paper.... it was pulled from their web store, and the paper you see currently listed is supposed to be the interim replacement. There is some confusion as to whether they changed the product ID number, but the packaging is reported to be different, with disclaimers for longevity now printed on the outside. There are several other websites "dedicated" to the Epson orange shift problem, which you can find if you search this forum, the link I have provided for you, as well as links at Steve's Digicam. That's where I "get this stuff". BTW, if you are truly looking for "facts", you might search for a better source than a sales rep at a trade show! If you examine the link I gave you, you'll find that the early Epson sales staff wasn't exactly forthcoming with any knowledge about the then newly discovered orange shift.

Ron S.

I also just left the Epson site and they do in fact still sell the
Premium Glossy paper, here's the link,

http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/ProductMediaSpec.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@1040965805.0974353457@@@@&BV_EngineID=jaljgcdemjkbfdlcfjgckicnf.0&Zoom=Big&oid=-8200

I don't know where you get this stuff!

Mike

It would be if it were true. Unfortunately, it's not 6 years
either. The Epson orange shift problem is showing up as soon as 24
hours after printing in some environments using the Premium Gloss
paper, which has since been pulled from the market to assist in
damage control. Documented by Epson, WIR and many others. As you
say, just the facts.

Ron S.

 

[Ron S.]

One final note on my part.... I really didn't want to dredge up any more of this on the Epson photo inkjets... they are very fine printers in my opinion; certainly among the best. But like all of the photo quality inkjets, they are still evolving and are not perfect. I reiterate my original thought, that Amal or anyone looking for some good advice on currently available inkjet printers read the original response to this thread posted by Dale about 4 days ago; an informed, unbiased summary of the current photo quality inkjets with regard to the numerous considerations involved when choosing a printer.

Ron S.

Surely you have heard of the Epson orange shift problem, and read
some of the multitude of complaints on this forum alone. If you do
a simple search, you'll find more links and an entire weeks worth
of material to read. You can also try
http://www.p-o-v-image.com/epson/ as a place to follow the event
timeline of this "situation". The 24 hour statement is from an
interview with Henry Wilhelm where he acknowledged the possibility
of this occurance under certain environmental conditions which were
not then part of their testing procedure. It is not on the WIR
website, where although this issue is acknowledged, it is
understated, to say the least. The earliest occurances I have been
made aware of personally were within one week.... seven days. You
shouldn't have to wait to talk to Epson reps at a marketing
convention... Epson will readily acknowledge this problem by
telephone, and will even buy your printer back if you want them to.
Also, if you search again on this very forum, you'll find all the
info on the Premium Glossy paper.... it was pulled from their web
store, and the paper you see currently listed is supposed to be the
interim replacement. There is some confusion as to whether they
changed the product ID number, but the packaging is reported to be
different, with disclaimers for longevity now printed on the
outside. There are several other websites "dedicated" to the Epson
orange shift problem, which you can find if you search this forum,
the link I have provided for you, as well as links at Steve's
Digicam. That's where I "get this stuff". BTW, if you are truly
looking for "facts", you might search for a better source than a
sales rep at a trade show! If you examine the link I gave you,
you'll find that the early Epson sales staff wasn't exactly
forthcoming with any knowledge about the then newly discovered
orange shift.

Ron S.

I also just left the Epson site and they do in fact still sell the
Premium Glossy paper, here's the link,

http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/ProductMediaSpec.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@1040965805.0974353457@@@@&BV_EngineID=jaljgcdemjkbfdlcfjgckicnf.0&Zoom=Big&oid=-8200

I don't know where you get this stuff!

Mike

It would be if it were true. Unfortunately, it's not 6 years
either. The Epson orange shift problem is showing up as soon as 24
hours after printing in some environments using the Premium Gloss
paper, which has since been pulled from the market to assist in
damage control. Documented by Epson, WIR and many others. As you
say, just the facts.

Ron S.

 

[Ben Stahl]

I don't know if anyone noticed, but on the Canon 8200 page, they say you get a free USB cardreader if you purchase an 8200...not a bad deal if you don't already have one. Even if you already do, there's probably someone you know who just got a digicam that could use it.

I am looking at the 8200 now but I wonder if Canon makes a wide version of this that would be capable of printing 11"x14"? It's looks to me like the 8200 only goes 8.5" or so wide. Anyone know?

And whoever it was that said you can even get decent quality output on a lowly Epson Photo 740, it's true! That's what I've got and with the glossy paper, it actually makes some sweet looking prints at best res. Amazing for a piece of plastic that can be had for well under $100. Remember less than 10 years ago Tektronix was trying to sell those $5,000 color laser-like printers that used this weird waxy paper and produced these really horrible looking prints with like 8 ungodly colors? How far we have come.

 

[Frank B #22373]

The total resolution of the Canon 8200 (1220x1220=1,488,400) is more than the Epson 870 (1440x720=1,036,800).

Frank B

Thomas Z wrote:
...

I have a 932C and it does beautiful prints but I'm looking to
upgrade to either an Epson 870 or the new PM-900C, 7 color printer,
either that or the canon 8200.

The only thing that discourages me from the Canon is the
1200x1200DPI which is alittle on the low side.
But if the prints are beautiful then I can give it a whirl.

 

[Frank B #22373]

Sorry, the Canon 8200 is (1200x1200= 1,440,000). Still higher than the 870.

Frank B

Frank B

Thomas Z wrote:
...

I have a 932C and it does beautiful prints but I'm looking to
upgrade to either an Epson 870 or the new PM-900C, 7 color printer,
either that or the canon 8200.

The only thing that discourages me from the Canon is the
1200x1200DPI which is alittle on the low side.
But if the prints are beautiful then I can give it a whirl.

 

[Mitch38581]

when are they coming out now?

Three comments/questions:

1) The previous posts may be refering to the S800 that Canon has slated to come out in April. It now appears on the canon web site, and not only has increased resolution, but also gotten faster, quieter, and (supposedly) improved print longevity.

2) Is Epson the only company offering the borderless (edge-to-edge) printing? I like the idea, but I am still leaning towards the 8200 (or S800, depending on availability).

3) Amal, please let us know what you think of your 8200...

 

[Perecz]

The total resolution of the Canon 8200 (1220x1220=1,488,400) is
more than the Epson 870 (1440x720=1,036,800).

Guys,

Sorry, but I have stupid question related to resolution.

I own Olympus 2020 camera. Maximum pictures size is 1600 x 1200 pixels.
Does printer resolution makes real difference in this case?

For example, Epson 870 has resulution 1440x720, Epson 780 has resolution 2880 x 720 dpi. Is it really better for me to buy printer with higher resolution if my pictures have size 1600 x 1200 pixels only?

 

[Ben Lovejoy]

As someone also looking for a new photo-printer, I've been following the thread with interest. Many thanks to Dale especially for the helpful comments.

But I wonder whether this fading issue is as big a deal as it seems? If I understand correctly, prints only fade when explosed to light, so it's not an issue for prints in an album.

How many of us want the same photo on display for years on end? I know I tend to replace my prints with new ones fairly regularly.

And if the worst comes to the worst, we can print out a new one.

Or am I missing something?

One question specifically for Dale - why do you say that for many, Epson is the only choice?

Ben

OK- I need you to back up a step Dale. What if archival quality is
an issue. I am a new user of an Olympus Z2000 and I own an Epson
Stylus Color 850 (my third Epson), but I want to print pictures
that are going to last. I heard Alps used to be the affordable way
to go,being dye Sub. instead of ink jet, but they are no longer
marketing printers. Who would you reccommend?