Canon i9950 has arrived!
Discussion
Ooo... exactly the quandry I am in at the moment.
I bought Amateur Photographer yesterday as they were reviewing the Epson. I eagerly scanned the review for a comparison with the i9950... lo and behold there was a small section dedicated to such a task...... with baited breath I read the whole thing, waiting for the definitive, emphatic conculsion and.... to paraphrase "There's nothing to choose between them"... bugger!
Anyway - it did go further to say that print quality - the Epson has it - *just* - but the Canon absolutely runs away with the speed (2 or 3 times faster).
I think that I'm not bothered about the speed to be honest. The only time I really want things quickly will be documents, not photos and I have a small A4 printer for that.
What it will come down to now is ink costs and purchase cost (though, on the surface it looks like that's a split decision too!)
I'll hopefully make a decision today and let you know how it goes.
Cheers,
Phil.
I bought Amateur Photographer yesterday as they were reviewing the Epson. I eagerly scanned the review for a comparison with the i9950... lo and behold there was a small section dedicated to such a task...... with baited breath I read the whole thing, waiting for the definitive, emphatic conculsion and.... to paraphrase "There's nothing to choose between them"... bugger!
Anyway - it did go further to say that print quality - the Epson has it - *just* - but the Canon absolutely runs away with the speed (2 or 3 times faster).
I think that I'm not bothered about the speed to be honest. The only time I really want things quickly will be documents, not photos and I have a small A4 printer for that.
What it will come down to now is ink costs and purchase cost (though, on the surface it looks like that's a split decision too!)
I'll hopefully make a decision today and let you know how it goes.
Cheers,
Phil.
dcw@pr said:I have to say that I probably agree... I'd like to think that I'm impartial and reasoning but I know that eventually I'd be berrating the Epson for taking so long...
I know print speed doesn't *matter*. but in my experience the Epsons are painfully slow, and it does get tiresome. It's always nice to be able to see your product ASAP I find
time for an honest rethink I think!! I was knocked out with the quality of Matt's(Nomoregravy) Epson 1290, but having printed the exact same photo and having them side by side, the Canon gets the nod. Looking very close, you can see lines where the printer head runs on the Epson, but it's totally smooth on the Canon. And from further away it just looks more 3D and alive, better sturated and more vibrant.
That's not to say it's better than the 1800 though, you'd have to another test for that. HTH.
Martin.
PS - before the knockers start, yes, I am very pro Canon, but I've tried to look at this objectively as it's other people's money at stake.
That's not to say it's better than the 1800 though, you'd have to another test for that. HTH.
Martin.
PS - before the knockers start, yes, I am very pro Canon, but I've tried to look at this objectively as it's other people's money at stake.
V6GTO said:
I was knocked out with the quality of Matt's(Nomoregravy) Epson 1290, but having printed the exact same photo and having them side by side, the Canon gets the nod. Looking very close, you can see lines where the printer head runs on the Epson, but it's totally smooth on the Canon. And from further away it just looks more 3D and alive, better sturated and more vibrant.
That's not to say it's better than the 1800 though, you'd have to another test for that. HTH.
Martin.
PS - before the knockers start, yes, I am very pro Canon, but I've tried to look at this objectively as it's other people's money at stake.
yeah! I hate Canon. oh hold on a second...
I've only seen the new Canon printers, and agree that the quality is sublime, but I am sure too that the Epson ones are just as good. Haveing said that I would still go for a Canon, although "back in the day" I would have chosen Epson because their colours were always nicer and more saturated than the Canons, all the way up until this latest generation IMHO
Well, I've bit-the-bullet as it were and ordered....... the Epson! 
Looking at the quality comparison in AP, the Epson looked far enough ahead of the Canon for me to ignore the print speeds.
Hopefully it's coming tomorrow - I'll post an appraisal when it's up and running!
I got it from eBuyer by the way
edited to add: an errant "d"
>> Edited by chim_knee on Wednesday 4th May 13:57
Looking at the quality comparison in AP, the Epson looked far enough ahead of the Canon for me to ignore the print speeds.
Hopefully it's coming tomorrow - I'll post an appraisal when it's up and running!
I got it from eBuyer by the way
edited to add: an errant "d"
>> Edited by chim_knee on Wednesday 4th May 13:57
dcw@pr said:
I know print speed doesn't *matter*. but in my experience the Epsons are painfully slow, and it does get tiresome. It's always nice to be able to see your product ASAP I find
I do mine at work. set it up to print do some sciencey crap and go back latter. buy ink through work too so only have to buy the paper lol
I think a lot of Epson's sloth is due to poor printer comms, either not using a large enough window or not managing buffers corectly, or a combination of both.
You shouldn't be able to see any lines on the 1290 though, probably means a bit of print head cleaning is needed or maybe even an alignment check needs to be done.
You shouldn't be able to see any lines on the 1290 though, probably means a bit of print head cleaning is needed or maybe even an alignment check needs to be done.
chim_knee said:I've got the Epson 2100, which uses the pigment inks. If I'm printing anything that I want to display or hang on the wall, I'll go for the matte finish, and in this area these inks win hands down IMHO. Although they're not as punchy as the dye-based inks, they are meant to have a wider gamut.
What's the opinion on the Epson's pigment based inks compared to the Canons... I am not looking at printing anything that needs years-and-years of longevity (i.e. certainly nothing I'd sell). Is that the only real difference between the two types?
Glossy isn't quite as good as something like the 1290 (dye inks), or the Canon 9950 (dye inks), however the new Epson 1800 (pigment inks) fixes this with an 8th ink - a "glossy optimiser" which coats the print.
I entered a few of my prints in the work photo club exhibition alongside prints from various sources including "proper" photo prints, and other inkjet printers, and quite a few people commented on how good my prints looked.
Personally, I'd go for the pigment inks unless you don't mind the prints fading. I've heard that this can start to happen after as little as a matter of months, however this obviously depends on the ink, paper and storage conditions of the print.
The next question is whether you want glossy or matte prints - if it's glossy, then it looks like it's either the Canon 9950 or Epson 1800, but if it's matte, then the 2100 is the one to go for.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff