Canon Pixma Pro 200 or Pixma PIXMA iX6850 / iP8750

[Juliansony]

Hi,

I looking for my first photo printer, I'm tired of sending my prints to labs only to have to resend after further edits. Plus all the waiting around.

Prints are purely for me and family.

I like the immediate results of home printing plus if I want bigger or better quality I can test at home and then send to a lab.

I'm very tempted with the iX6850 or the iP8750 both cost between £180 and £250 and the ink is cheap too £50.

Or would I notice a huge difference if I spent a lot more and bought the new Canon Pixma Pro 200 - £450GBP / $550 USD plus ink at £125

Can I ask what your thoughts are?

Many thanks,

Julian

--
The pen is mightier than the sword if the sword is very short, and the pen is very sharp. (Terry Pratchett)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lifeonthelimit/

 

[NAwlins Contrarian]

I looking for my first photo printer, I'm tired of sending my prints to labs only to have to resend after further edits. Plus all the waiting around.

Prints are purely for me and family.

I like the immediate results of home printing plus if I want bigger or better quality I can test at home and then send to a lab.

I'm very tempted with the iX6850 or the iP8750 both cost between £180 and £250 and the ink is cheap too £50.

Or would I notice a huge difference if I spent a lot more and bought the new Canon Pixma Pro 200 - £450GBP / $550 USD plus ink at £125

Can I ask what your thoughts are?

IMO for photo printing the iP8750 (a/k/a iP8720) is a clear and definite step up from the iX6850 (iX6820). The added gray ink is not a small thing.

I doubt the inks really vary that much in price. An inkset for the Pro-200 costs more, but you're getting more ink, and the net ink cost per area printed probably does not differ that much.

Between the iP8750 and the Pro-200, only you can weigh the added £200 cost versus the improved tonal smoothness and probably slightly larger gamut and slightly darker maximum black. And if that added £200 doesn't deter you, at least as a thought exercise, maybe ask yourself: how much more than a Pro-200 would a Pro-300 cost, and would that be worth it to me?

 

[Juliansony]

I looking for my first photo printer, I'm tired of sending my prints to labs only to have to resend after further edits. Plus all the waiting around.

Prints are purely for me and family.

I like the immediate results of home printing plus if I want bigger or better quality I can test at home and then send to a lab.

I'm very tempted with the iX6850 or the iP8750 both cost between £180 and £250 and the ink is cheap too £50.

Or would I notice a huge difference if I spent a lot more and bought the new Canon Pixma Pro 200 - £450GBP / $550 USD plus ink at £125

Can I ask what your thoughts are?

IMO for photo printing the iP8750 (a/k/a iP8720) is a clear and definite step up from the iX6850 (iX6820). The added gray ink is not a small thing.

I doubt the inks really vary that much in price. An inkset for the Pro-200 costs more, but you're getting more ink, and the net ink cost per area printed probably does not differ that much.

Between the iP8750 and the Pro-200, only you can weigh the added £200 cost versus the improved tonal smoothness and probably slightly larger gamut and slightly darker maximum black. And if that added £200 doesn't deter you, at least as a thought exercise, maybe ask yourself: how much more than a Pro-200 would a Pro-300 cost, and would that be worth it to me?

Great thank you for the note back.

After lots of additional research and watching the wonderful Mattias Burling ((1) Printing photos at home - Why & how? (Canon iP8750/Instax SP-2) - YouTube) I've decided on the iP8750. For £220 I think it's a good toe into the water of photo printing at home.

Cheers again. Julian