Canon vs Epson printers

<p>As I scroll around looking for user info on Canon printers, it seems there isn't much. It's all about Epson. Does anyone have a high opinion on the quality of B&W prints from a Canon printer? Specifically a Canon PIXMA ip8720 printer. A friend has one and he can't seem to get a B&W print from it without a color cast -- usually magenta. The paper profiles are installed for Canon papers and for Red River. I had an Epson Workforce 30 and I printed pages of B&W photographs for several books I made and they all printed as neutral B&W. I used Red River Premium Matte paper. I know that there are many variables for this kind of "color cast" problem but my main question is -- are Canons not really good enough? </p>

<p>My PIXMA PRO 100 is fantastic, in B&W and color.</p>

<p>Why don't you simply stick with your Epson?</p>

<p>Spending some time in reading reviews before I got my Epson SC P600, I didn't get the impression that they differ to any great extent in terms of quality.<br>

To me it narrowed down to:<br>

1. Epson Sure-Color line can print roll paper.<br>

2. Canon printers can be less prone to clogging.</p>

<p>I got the Epson. I make sure to print a good sized print every week.</p>

<p>my first "photo quality" printer was an Epson and I never saw any reason to change. Inks are expensive for all of them (the razor blade people used to give away razors so people....). And they all do really seem to work best with their own brand papers, fwiw.<br /> Any pigment-based printer will probably provide longer lasting colors than dye-based.</p>

<p>A couple of years ago, the Epsons had an edge in B&W. Probably any new printer with special black cartridges will do well enough these days?</p>

I do not know that specific Canon printer but have preety much exclusively used Canon printers for the past ten years.

Mostly for fine art and portfolio work on b&w and color. The print quality, color, and monochrome tonality is excellent (as

with any printer you need high quality profiles for the papers you choose to use), and they have been inexpensive to

operate.

<p>I use and have used both. Both work very well.</p>

<p>Thanks all for your responses. I got a Canon after the Epson clogged up permanently. But I'm still not completely happy with it. I get color casts (B&W prints) also with my PIXMA ip 8720 - even with Canon paper. The Dell monitor is calibrated with Spyder2Express.</p>

<p>My Epson clogged up (dried up, that is) through disuse. I went out and bought cheap dye-based ink at a tenth of the price of the Epson real ink, and did repeated cleanings (really, really high ink use for doing this which is why I bought...). It came back on line and now working beautifully with real ink in it.<br>

Maybe something like that would work for your old Epson?</p>

<p>Here's a review:</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/reviews/canon-ip8720/</p>

<p>The reviewer didn't seem to experience any problems. </p>

<p>Does that model come with a LR plugin? My PIXMA PRO did and I printed a test sheet, with calibration settings. Mine required on a fraction of an adjustment with every paper that I tried. There was no color cast. After monitor calibratioon and correction, what percentage of sRGB gamut and RGB does it achieve?</p>

<p>Thanks for the review link, David. I have no idea if there's a LR plugin or not. I'll check it out. I'm using the --- not-very-sophisticated-limited-basic-PhotoShopElements 5. It's always sufficed for my needs so far.<br>

JDM - The old Epson is long gone! </p>

<p>I doubt that the plugin will work with your PSE5. I think it's designed around relatively current versions of LR and PS.</p>

<p>After you recheck your calibration, are you getting 100% of sRGB and a decent percentage of RGB?</p>

<p>I agree with your observation. Epson seemed to have cornered the market from the "chattering photographic classes". I, however, find my current Canon PRO-100 a superior printer to any Epson or HP I have had in the past, if only because it never seems to require nozzle cleaning or head aligning. As we know from the camera world, Canon are not "cool", but they get the job done very competently. In terms of output, this will depend on comparing like with like (number of inks, dye or pigment), but I am pretty certain in terms of output you will be hard pressed to find any differences between Canon or Epson, and if you do, whether one is "better" rather than slightly "different" will be debatable.</p>

I have both wide format 44” printers.

Canon is very fast but the user interface sucks.

Epson yes, cloggs up fast, but is far superior imo to Canon in quality of prints.

I have used a variety of mostly Epson inkjet printers, 13" wide, over the last 20 years, with both dye and pigment based inks. On of my favorite prints, a B&W rendition, has been hanging for nearly 15 years. There is not tint, other than a somewhat warm black (I used process black), and no fading in that time. The print is dye-based on matte paper, matted and framed under glass.My last printer was an Epson 2200, which did a nice job before it clogged permanently. That said, the Canon Pixma Pro 10 does a better job and is twice as fast. At 55 lbs, it is a monster, so I put it on a commercial printer stand (Balt) with wheels.

 

Clogging was a problem, and clearing the clogs used up a lot of ink. It is important to use an Epson at least weekly to avoid major problems.The Pro 10, pigment based with 11 cartridges, which has not clogged even after a month or two of disuse. All inkjet undergo a periodic cleaning cycle, even when not used. I suspect Canon does a better job of this. Unlike my previous printers, the Pro 10 is connected by ethernet (or USB or WiFi), which means I can place the printer nearly anyplace in my house, and use it from any home computer, laptop, iPhone or iPad.

 

Sadly, it does not do roll paper, so large panoramas are not possible, and the maximum width is 13". The Walgreens store near my has a 36" or 40" printer for large and long prints, and does an excellent job if I give them a good file. I work in a color calibrated and managed environment.

 

Epson printers use the piezoelectric principle to create ink drops, whereas Canon uses heating elements to provide pressure. I have always thought that the piezo method was more flexible, but I have no issues with Canon. The print head of an Epson can usually only be replace at the factory, which can cost more than a new printer. Large format Epson's may be modular. The print head of the Pro 10 is modular, and relatively inexpensive.

I had an Epson ink jet several years back and could not get along with it (replaced heads did not improve matters). I now have two Canon ink jets ( an A3 for my photos etc and a simple scanner/copier/ A4 printer for everyday use ) and they are just perfect for my needs.