| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/16/2003 05:53:23 PM · #1 |
I was looking at these two printers today and almost walked out with one but I decided to wait a bit. They're very similar in features with the Epson edging the Canon in rez but the Canon winning in print speed.
Anyone have experience with either? I have a Canon S800 right now and love the prints it produces but I'm looking to move to something that can go bigger.
Thoughts? |
|
|
|
05/16/2003 06:06:01 PM · #2 |
i used to use the Epson Stylus Photo 870, now the canon s900. I'm a huge fan of the canon, both speed (way faster) and quality (looks the same to me). According to //www.CNET.com, the Canon wins hands down in cost per print. The 6 separate ink cartridges is a huge improvement over my old one (don't know if epson has gone to this now or not).
|
|
|
|
05/16/2003 06:47:44 PM · #3 |
The Epson is also a multi-cartridge machine (six colors + black). It is definitely slower than the S9000. It does use Epon's interesting pigment-based archival inks, which should give it an edge both in quality and longevity of the prints. I've considered both of these printers as well, and if I were purchasing one today, I think I would go Epson. They are both awesome printers, and at reasonable prices as well. For pretty good reviews of each...
//www.steves-digicams.com/2002_reviews/epson_2200.html
//www.steves-digicams.com/2002_reviews/canon_s9000_pg4.html#conclusion |
|
|
|
05/16/2003 07:00:17 PM · #4 |
Don't forget the new Canon printer i9100 which is replacing the S9000. It's a 4800 dpi printer as apposed to 2400 dpi of the S9000. It's also a multi-cartridge printer (6 - 5 colours plus black).
Here's the article about the release of new Canon printers.
//www.steves-digicams.com/pr/canon_02272003_i9100_i450_i470d_pr.html
|
|
|
|
05/16/2003 10:17:47 PM · #5 |
| I'm sure this won't mean much, but personally I would take the 2200. I've always liked the print quality of Epson. Also I find it hard to believe Canon isn't making the i9100 ieee1394(firewire) or at least usb2.0 compatible. That's just sad. For me, that's a big thumbs up for Epson. Not to mention the Epson is available now. |
|
|
|
05/16/2003 11:12:18 PM · #6 |
I have the 2200 and an HP. I love the 2200. The inks are great and the archival matte paper is both inexpensive and superb. I think the Epson 960 is a smaller version - still has 7 colors?
Dennis
|
|
|
|
05/17/2003 12:18:34 PM · #7 |
Looking at the Canon i9100 and the Epson 2200 I don't see much difference in specs but the Epson is listed at $200 more.
Is there that much difference? |
|
|
|
05/17/2003 12:49:23 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by krets:
Looking at the Canon i9100 and the Epson 2200 I don't see much difference in specs but the Epson is listed at $200 more.
Is there that much difference? |
Krets,
I have an Epson 820 which is a very inexpensive printer. It creates excellent photos but it usually requires Epson papers and inks to do so. There is a wide array of Epson papers to choose from. Does the Canon printer have the same requirements? If so are there enough paper choices available to make you happy if you were to choose it?
Bob
|
|
|
|
05/17/2003 12:57:53 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
It does use Epon's interesting pigment-based archival inks, which should give it an edge both in quality and longevity of the prints. |
Now I haven't been following printers for a long time now, but I remember reading that Epson's Pigment based inks do not yet have the same tonal range as regular inks. I like the water resistance of it though, which I think is worth it.
|
|
|
|
05/17/2003 01:00:45 PM · #10 |
A guy a work with, that sells prints professionally, uses the 2200. He had a 1280, but got rid of it for the 2200 and it's added print life.
As far as the DPI differences, I would not worry about that, I do not think the eye could tell a difference. If you needed the added archival ability, go for the Espon. Aren't there light grey inks available for the Epson for black and white printing.
I do have a friend at work with a new Canon, and it makes beautiful prints, too.
From what I have seen, I would be happy with either, but would probably lean toward the Canon is it less expensive.
I have been thinking about these same issues lately, as I am just using a 3 color HP right now, and want to upgrade. I wish a could bring home a large format Canon, an Espon 1280, and a 2200, and play with them for a while.
|
|
|
|
05/17/2003 01:10:25 PM · #11 |
Goto the store and ask them if you could print the same Photo on both printers....
|
|
|
|
05/17/2003 01:25:17 PM · #12 |
| I have a Canon S800 now and I can tell you that you have to use the Canon paper. I had some HP paper left from an older printer and the images looked like absolute crap. The ink was running down the paper. |
|
|
|
05/17/2003 04:56:00 PM · #13 |
you can use Kodak paper too, but you need a custom profile, and some specific printer settings, RCRAWFORD uses kodak paper, and his images are great
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/07/2025 02:12:52 PM EDT.
