P
puss
Please read the Reviews like the one on Toms web site
HP is dearer to run, well know fact.
Please read the Reviews like the one on Toms web site
HP is dearer to run, well know fact.
P
PC Medic
Hmm never had problem with my Canon printheads and even if I did unlike
Epson my printhead is covered under the Canon warranty.
Ahh, how I remember the days when Tom's did not appear t be a Ziff Davis
publication!
B
Bill
Matthew said:
Sounds like my experience...a lot of the nozzles just suddenly stopped
working.
It's just scare tactics. My friend's i550 printhead died recently and he
used nothing but genuine Canon ink tanks from day one. Obviously the
printheads are NOT designed "for the life of the printer", and he's
rather ticked off about it, as am I.
I was using AtlanticInkjet ink, which is supplied by Formulabs, and it
produced great photos. No complaints with them at all. I'll continue to
refill my next printer and I'll be using the same supplier.
Unfortunately your theory is slightly flawed...make sure you're
comparing prices properly. Never use the companies claimed cost per page
or yield numbers, which are always exaggerated. And you can't just
assume using prices for all cartridges when some are not used for photo
printing. For example, the HP 7960 only uses two cartridges (six
colours) when printing photos, not all four. And the Canon iP4000 uses
only four ink tanks (four colours). That brings costs much closer
together.
Also, I've found discrepancies using various online reviews for testing
methods to calculate cost per page. One shows the prices are not really
far apart, while another shows they are very different. Yet both claim
similar testing methods. So who is right? Personally I don't trust
either of them and prefer to go on my own experiences.
Besides, refilling helps to negate any real or imagined differences.
P
PC Medic
Bill said:
First let me say this is not a pro or Con 3rd party ink response and then
continue by saying this is the kind of deductive thinking that spreads false
rumoors. Using this logic one would then deduce that because user A who only
uses Canon paper gets a paper jam which during removal damages the ASF
sensor and that user B who uses cheap paper never has a problem that the ASF
snsor is not designed to last the life of the printer. Face it S**t happens
and that is why products include warranty's. The fact that Canon covers the
printhead in that warranty is eveidence that they must feel it IS designed
for the life of the printer.
Talk about flawed figures. What do you do with the remaining ink in that
cartridge that one of the colors ran out in? You chuck it in the garbage
with the cartridge. That increases cost per page. You buy a $35 replacement
cause one color is out, I buy an $11 replacement (which yilelds more pages
per tank than your HP.
Also, I've found discrepancies using various online reviews for testing
methods to calculate cost per page. One shows the prices are not really
far apart, while another shows they are very different. Yet both claim
similar testing methods. So who is right? Personally I don't trust
either of them and prefer to go on my own experiences.
Besides, refilling helps to negate any real or imagined differences.
Until your printhead quits and you have to replace it thereby negating the
cost savings of JohnnyJoe Ink.
X
xNokia3390x
I've read many reviews on there, and after having personally tried the
printer in the reviews I don't always agree with the review. I don't know,
I'd rather just test it myself or see what others have said about it.
HP's might be more expensive to run, but you'll have less trouble in the
long run. What happens when you have a big print job and your print head
gets clogged? You can't just run down to WalMart and get a new printer
head, but you *can* get a new cartridge.
X
xNokia3390x
PC Medic said:
Or that they know it might fail within 12 months, and if not, they could
care less because it will fail after the warranty period is over and tough
luck for the consumer.
Do you think everyone will have unequal usage, therefore requiring premature
cartridge replacement? In my first set of Canon cartridges, I found that I
had just a little more yellow than the rest of my colors. Hardly a savings.
I'm now on my second set and can see I have about 1/3 more yellow than the
rest of my colors. Who knows, by the time I use all the ink from this
second set of cartridges, the yellow may be down to the same levels as the
other colors. It's not a good assumption that individual cartridges
automatically save you money. That type of mentality is exactly what the
marketing folks love. Unless you are constantly printing say, a red logo,
chances are you'll end up with just a little more yellow than the rest of
the colors. Whether or not it's a fair trade off is up to the consumer.
I'd rather just replace the whole thing and get a new printhead so I don't
have to worry about the print head.
P
puss
Epson only clog on startup not when they are running, I should know I am on my
3rd model..
Its idiots that let them clog, Epson's are for people with Brains like me.
You could not even give me a HP..
Epson heads do not ROT..
B
Bill
PC said:
Not rumours, actual facts.
My Canon i850 printhead died yesterday at 16 months and some 5,000
pages. A friend's i550 printhead died earlier this week, and it too is
16 months old (one week newer than mine since I bought mine before him),
but only some 2,500 pages.
The 16 month period is hopefully just a coincidence, but it's also
obvious that the printheads are not designed to last.
I should point out that Canon has been completely uncaring in response
to the failures, even after pointing out the low page counts, and that
they both died within days of each other. Out of warranty means you're
out of luck.
So the life of the printer is only expected to be 12 months?
Canon originally claimed "life of the printer" for the printheads. Now
they are claiming 10,000 pages. Neither is anywhere near what we've
seen, and Canon doesn't seem to care about page counts, just if it's
under warranty or not.
And then a few days later you buy another $11 replacement. Then another.
Hmm...that's $33 dollars, pretty close.
Don't forget that I've been refilling the ink tanks in my i850 for over
a year, and I know from first-hand experience that even though the tanks
run low at different times, overall usage of the three colours is
roughly the same. All I have to do is put the bulk ink bottles on the
counter and look at how much is in them - they're all within a few ml of
each other.
What HP printer? I've been using a Canon i850 for the last 16 months.
And do you have special ink tanks? From what I've read on reviews, page
yield is similar if you use the large cartridges. It seems the
discrepancy of individual ink tank cost to tri-colour cartridge cost is
what throws the comparisons out of whack. One review says costs are
close, another says HP costs 3-4 times as much. That doesn't sit right
with me.
B
Bill
xNokia3390x said:
I concur. I've refilled my ink tanks 6 times out of my bulk bottles, and
it's easy to see overall usage is very similar.
P
PC Medic
xNokia3390x said:
My current printers include
BJC-3000 - 4 years old never a problem
S520 - 3 years old and never a problem
i560 - about a year old and is replacement for another S520 that started to
have intermittent paper feed problems. canon no longer had replacement
S520's so replaced it with a brand new i560 (never a printhead problem with
either of these )
iP4000 - Just purchased about a month ago and runs like a champ.
As for tough luck for the customer after the warranty is over, well duh!
most companies do have time periods on their warranties.That is why they
offer extended service plans (which by the way in Canon's case also covers
the printhead).
Yes, the norm is 'unequal' usage. It is a simple matter of how additive and
subtractive color printing work. You will tend to use more of one color than
others. If all of your colors are running out simultaneously, you are doing
some very out of the ordinary printing.
I prefer the single tanks with a quality printhead that also do not have to
worry about replacing.
P
PC Medic
Bill said:
And I currently own 5 Canon printers 2 of which are over 4 years old and
NEVER had a printhead issue.
I also use 3 of these in heavy printing within our church and estimate over
8-10,000 pages have passed through them.
I had to replace a single printer since switching to Canon several years
ago. It was an S520, was 2 months out of warranty and after explaining that
the problem (paper feed) had been occuring intermittently for a few months,
but never bad enough to call about they sent me a replacement over-night at
no charge. Not only that it was a brand new later model i560 as they no
longer stocked the S520 I was told.
No, no more than the life of a refrigerator is 12 months or a washer and
dryer.
You are twisting to make an argument where there isn't one.
If you are looking for lifetime warranties you are out of luck.
Please point me to these claims. And more importantly the place it states
this now (or ever) in their warranty or any printer manufactures warranty.
The fact yours failed prematurely (but out of warranty) is a shame, but it
happens and I am sure was no grand conspiracy on Canon's part any more than
it is any other manufactures. You should look into failure vs units sold
sometime and see just how low they are.
It would be if I had ever experienced having to replace them so closely
which I never have.
And even if I did, I am still getting ALL I am paying for as I am not
throwing away partially filled tanks.
But of course it is Canon's fault that your printhead failed after only 16
months of 3rd party refills.
Check out the subject of the thread.
I am sure it wouldn't
X
xNokia3390x
PC Medic said:
What exactly was your original point? That Canon includes the printhead in
their *extended* warranties? Big deal.
Your usage determines the norm? Hah! That's a laugh. "Quality printhead"
eh? I can't comment on that, but I'll find out down the line how that goes.
X
xNokia3390x
PC Medic said:
You got lucky. My Canon BJC5000 was eight months old when the BC-21e
printhead failed. I didn't print much, and used only OEM cartridges. I
asked Canon what they could do, and they said I had to mail the old one back
at MY cost (and it's a big printer, bigger than the average printer) and
then they'd see if they can do anything. Why not just send me a printhead?
I threw the printer away, went to Costco and bought a HP DeskJet 930c. The
HP is a workhorse and some people claim 100,000+ pages from it - with a
cleaning/service at 50,000 pages. I'm at 4,000 pages so I expect to have
the printer for a long time to come. The 45/78 cartridge combo is excellent
and I don't need to replace the cartridges very often.
What was your point in mentioning the printhead was covered in the 12 month
warranty?
Does it matter if your printhead fails in a few years? I'm willing to pay a
bit more for convenience, which in this case means I don't have to worry
about the printhead.
Where exactly does he blame Canon? I do see him blaming Canon for the
failure of his friend's printhead @ 5,000 pages after using OEM ink, which
is definitely understandable.
As far as yields for the cartridges, I'll do a quick comparison between my
HP 930c and my i560. I replace the cartridges in my HP about every 8 months
when I used it as my primary printer - the color is rated at 900 pages
(double capacity) and the black is rated up to 933 pages. I do a lot of
text printing. On the Canon, I've gone through 2.5 black cartridges in
eight months, as well as almost two sets of color cartridges. Costs for the
HP are $50 (double capacity color) +$ 21 = $71 and the Canon is $30 ($12 x
2.5) + $40.50 ($27 x 1.5) = $70.50. Like I said, this is based on my usage.
It's a hassle on the Canon to keep changing cartridges so often, once every
eight months sounds good to me.
BTW, I also owned a Canon i320. It failed a few months after the warranty
had expired. I stored it for a month before giving it to a relative, and it
just would not print ANYTHING. Multiple deep cleanings yielded nothing. I
stored my HP 930c for about four months before giving it to another relative
to borrow, and it worked like a charm right out of the box. My storing of
the printer is what killed it, but I mean, one month? I guess if anybody
plans on moving, you might as well throw away the Canon printer
B
Bill
PC said:
I know someone with a Canon s520 as well, and it has been going strong
for a long time too. That's part of the reason I was willing to try
Canon. But that does not negate the fact that we're starting to hear of
printhead failures for printers that were supposed to last for years.
It's well known that Canon promoted the i-series as such. Contact Canon
for the info, or simply read any review.
They have since changed their claims, and now say the life is expected
to be 5,000-10,000 pages depending on printer model.
So you have inside knowledge of this from Canon? I tried to get more
info from them, but they were unwilling to share such info.
Perhaps you can enlighten us.
You failed to catch the part where I said a friend's i550 also failed
using Canon ink tanks. So yes, it _IS_ Canon's fault.
Canon makes great cameras and I have thousands invested in glass, but
I've been soured on their printers and won't try them again. I hear
mostly bad experiences, and only one case (s520) where they like the
printer...so there it is...
P
PC Medic
xNokia3390x said:
Never said 'my usage determines the norm', but owning 5 myself and working
in the computer and peripheral service industry where I deal with theses
printers on a daily basis, I can say that running out of all colors
simultaneously is not. Does it happen, probably, but hardly the 'norm'
anymore than the fact that because a handful of folks out of the millions of
units sold come to a newsgroup whining about there dead printhead or other
problem indicates that the companies knowingly produce bad printheads.
P
PC Medic
xNokia3390x said:
No I did not get lucky, I am referring to a unit released within the past 4
years that has a warranty which covered the printhead.
You are referring to an older printer with old technology and a 'consumable'
printhead which carried no warranty. I seriously doubt they meant for you to
send the entire printer to check a consumable printhead when all they would
need is the printhead.
I'm happy that your happy.
If it needs to be explained to you, then it probably does not matter as
chances are you would not undersatnd (or admit it if you did)
Does it matter if your printhead fails in a few years? I'm willing to pay
a
bit more for convenience, which in this case means I don't have to worry
about the printhead.
Where exactly does he blame Canon? I do see him blaming Canon for the
failure of his friend's printhead @ 5,000 pages after using OEM ink, which
is definitely understandable.
As far as yields for the cartridges, I'll do a quick comparison between my
HP 930c and my i560. I replace the cartridges in my HP about every 8
months
when I used it as my primary printer - the color is rated at 900 pages
(double capacity) and the black is rated up to 933 pages. I do a lot of
text printing. On the Canon, I've gone through 2.5 black cartridges in
eight months, as well as almost two sets of color cartridges. Costs for
the
HP are $50 (double capacity color) +$ 21 = $71 and the Canon is $30 ($12 x
2.5) + $40.50 ($27 x 1.5) = $70.50. Like I said, this is based on my
usage.
It's a hassle on the Canon to keep changing cartridges so often, once
every
eight months sounds good to me.
BTW, I also owned a Canon i320. It failed a few months after the warranty
had expired. I stored it for a month before giving it to a relative, and
it
just would not print ANYTHING. Multiple deep cleanings yielded nothing.
I
stored my HP 930c for about four months before giving it to another
relative
to borrow, and it worked like a charm right out of the box. My storing of
the printer is what killed it, but I mean, one month? I guess if anybody
plans on moving, you might as well throw away the Canon printer
I don't know, I have several, some which get used very infrequently and
never had a problem nor do I have to run all these cleanings. Now you don't
suppose you got a bad one? Nah...that could never happen. I mean really a
manufacturer sell millions of units and have some exhibit problems! That
simply can't be. By the way, did you hear the news that HP has closed their
call center and will be discontinuing technical support because you have
never had an issue with their printer!
P
PC Medic
Bill said:
No but what does is the fact of where most of this comes from.
What percentage of consumers do you suppose visit a site or newsgroup to
tell others of their positive experience with a product?
What percent do you think report this positive experience to friends or
family members unless asked 'how do you like your brand X product'?
Now how many do you think convey negative experiences to these same groups
without being asked?
Never have I seen any such claim, care to point out a reference to one. Care
to point out the Canon literature that states 5k-10k page life?
May want to watch trade publications. While it takes compilation of
different resource articles, it is not hard to get accurate approximations.
And I am not referring to just Canon.
Perhaps you can enlighten us.
You failed to catch the part where I said a friend's i550 also failed
using Canon ink tanks. So yes, it _IS_ Canon's fault.
I did not fail nor ignore that part, it still proves no grand conspiracy to
manufacture products with the mythical timebomb that goes off rendering them
useless X number of months outside warranty. Products fail, it happens, but
it is a small (VERY SMALL) percentage of units sold.
I guess then you hear what you choose to hear as I alone have mentioned my
5+ good experiences.
I will agree with one thing you have said though. They do make good cameras.
I have an A70, Rebel 2000 and my new Digital Rebel which are best of the
best in my book.
B
Bill
PC said:
Sorry, I don't work in the industry like you, and have little time to
follow it up.
Since you don't seem interested in providing any evidence yourself, you
can find your own references.
But I will repeat a hint (again)...read any review about Canon i-series
printers. If they don't mention the life expectancy of the printhead,
I'll poke a pencil in my eye. *
I'm sorry...I must be an idiot...I don't recall stating anything about a
"grand conspiracy".
Perhaps you can quote my words for me since my comprehension skills are
lacking?
I read what you wrote...but decided that bragging about my own positive
experiences with printer life does not greatly add to the discussion
about failures.
I like Nikon too, but don't own and never will own, any of their glass
or bodies. Does that make me evil in some way? Perhaps it does, and if
so, then so be it...
* - ok, I'm not really going to do that.
P
PC Medic
Bill said:
And I am sure all of these reviewers printed 5000-10000 pages to confirm
this.
This is also quite different than the implication that canon was making such
an absurd statement.
B
Bill
PC said:
Perhaps...perhaps not. But since you're the one in the know, I'm sure
you have the answer, and this is some kind of test.
However, I'm confident the reviewer's statement about printhead life is
garnered from press releases and/or technical info from Canon given to
the reviewing staff. I seriously doubt they just make it up for fun.
No implication at all...it's in black and white print for all to see.