epson 1800 v canon 9950

  • Thread starter Thread starter ian lincoln
  • Start date Start date
I

ian lincoln

I can get both at the same price. what would you guys recommend. Sheer
quality output, print longevity isn't an issue.
 
frederick said:
I suspect this is a canon vs epson troll.
Some reviews are at http://www.photo-i.co.uk/
You are unlikely to get unbiased opinion from usenet / forums.
Click to expand...

No trolling. i see from the link that chroma life inks are supposed to
solve the last problem with canons. The fade. However i haven't seen a
pixma to replace the canon i9950. So is it a matter of replacing the inks
or is there a new printer on the way or what. No doubt Japan then USA will
hear first.

The review puts the colour gamut ahead for canon by an extremely tiny
amount.

Epson added photo grey and blue to the 1800. to get 8 inks. canon have
added red and green to the standard 6 to get up to 8. canon inks are £7 ish
each. epson are £11.90. So all in all there is little to choose overall.
This leaves me undecided.
 
ian lincoln said:
I can get both at the same price. what would you guys recommend. Sheer
quality output, print longevity isn't an issue.
Click to expand...

Hi.

I don't know much about the Canon, but the best Ink-jet Prints I have ever
seen were done on an R1800. The owner had used both Glossy and Matt Papers,
and some of the Glossies were done without the Gloss Optimiser, and were
still superb.

I am a member of the Scottish Photographic Circle which is a Prints only
Club, with a selective Membership. I get to see a lot of Prints, from a lot
of different sources, and the above were comparable to the very best Ciba's.

I am not saying that myself or just anyone, could produce the same quality,
but the R1800 in the right hands is fantastic.

Roy G
 
Roy said:
Hi.

I don't know much about the Canon, but the best Ink-jet Prints I have ever
seen were done on an R1800. The owner had used both Glossy and Matt
Papers, and some of the Glossies were done without the Gloss Optimiser,
and were still superb.

I am a member of the Scottish Photographic Circle which is a Prints only
Club, with a selective Membership. I get to see a lot of Prints, from a
lot of different sources, and the above were comparable to the very best
Ciba's.

I am not saying that myself or just anyone, could produce the same
quality, but the R1800 in the right hands is fantastic.

Roy G
Click to expand...

The guy at my club who bought one usually wins everything. He had a 2100
before that. He also spent £200 or more on having a professional colour
calibration. His actual camera is a 300D.

Out of 4 epson owners 3 have had clogging, banding, ink running probs and
one doesn't. I have a canon and an epson. there are hp users too. The
rest are film stalwarts. Despite the higher quoted resolution the epson
seems to have a softer focus. I have to crank up the sharpness to match the
canon.
 
ian said:
No trolling. i see from the link that chroma life inks are supposed to
solve the last problem with canons. The fade. However i haven't seen a
pixma to replace the canon i9950. So is it a matter of replacing the inks
or is there a new printer on the way or what. No doubt Japan then USA will
hear first.

The review puts the colour gamut ahead for canon by an extremely tiny
amount.

Epson added photo grey and blue to the 1800. to get 8 inks. canon have
added red and green to the standard 6 to get up to 8. canon inks are £7 ish
each. epson are £11.90. So all in all there is little to choose overall.
This leaves me undecided.
Click to expand...
The Epson inks are Red, Blue, Yellow, Matte and Photo Black, Cyan and
Magenta - plus a "gloss optimiser".
There is a bigger differential in prices in the UK than here (New
Zealand). I pay about £7 / NZ$20 for Epson Cartridges.
In any case ink cost will be higher for the R1800 than the i9950.
The i9950 prints tend to have more "punch" at default settings than the
R1800. Epson tend to have better software / drivers and out of the box
colour accuracy. The i9950 is faster - although the R1800 is much
faster than older epson photo printers. Both are pretty quiet.
In six months use - with periods of several weeks with the printer idle,
I haven't had to run a cleaning cycle on my R1800. I don't know if this
is good luck - but apart from occasional reports, I think Epson may have
nailed the clogging problems of old with their newer printers R1800/2400 .
Fade resistance is an issue if printing with dye ink on other than
swellable polymer coated papers. These papers have poor water
resistance - in contrast to the "fast-dry" photo papers which are
provide both fade resistance and a high level of water resistance when
used with pigment inks. Those fast dry papers produce pleasing results
with dye printers - but generally poor fade resistance. For printing on
matte papers, pigment is the way to go. If prints are on the correct
papers and are framed behind glass, then there is not a huge advantage
to pigment. If unframed, then on photo papers, pigment ink prints are
still very fade resistant - and probably more importantly are "sneeze
resistant" (yuk) as the surface can be wiped clean with a damp cloth.
Pigment ink generally offers the option to print on a wider range of papers.
The difference in colour gamut is small - but dye prints do produce
deeper more saturated blacks in particular.
If both printers were the same price, then IMO the Epson is the way to
go - so long as you understand the differences between dye and pigment
inks - and need the advantage. The i9950 is more comparable in output
quality to the Epson 1290.
 
Back
Top