Printer search: Canon Pixma Pro-1 or Epson Stylus Pro 3880 ?

[FPB]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi everybody,

 

my first started thread here on LUF. This forum has proven to be a great source of information and valuable help from the members. Now I have a question regarding printers:

 

Before using my M9P I used large format gear and printed on my own Epson Stylus Pro 7800. Sold that gear and the printer some time ago.

 

Now I want to step back into printing and narrowed my search down to either Epson Stylus Pro 3880 or Canon Pixma-Pro 1. Most likely I will start with Canson Baryta Photo or Canson Platine Fibre Rag. I do not necessarily need the size the Epson prints, A3 would be sufficient. It's going to be used for my own photo books and the prints would be in color, only rarely in B/W.

 

I compared the Canson ICC profiles for both papers in Colorsync. Generally speaking, Epson 3880 has more volume (color space) in the shadow area, whereas Pixma Pro-1 shows more volume in the midtones with more saturated colors. An individual profile for the printer may follow later.

Specs seem to indicate better resolution for the Canon.

 

Perhaps we have forum members here that came down this road and would like to share the reasons for their decision. My question to those of you who have really experience with both printers (own or from third party experience):

 

What speaks clearly in favour of one model ?

 

I appreciate any well-founded insight and many thanks in advance for your help.

 

Bill

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[woorob]

Bill,

 

Not sure this will be directly applicable, but it might be interesting to you nevertheless.

 

I recently purchased a wide format printer, but at a less expensive price point than you are considering – the Canon Pro-100. There are some compelling rebates available for this printer, which tipped the balance for me.

 

The Pro-100 is quite heavy and requires a fairly large footprint. From my perspective, the prints were terrific. I had real problems, however, obtaining a reliable connection on either a wireless or Ethernet network. I spent a lot of time trying to get things right and contacted Canon’s technical support, who were not able to lend any meaningful assistance, so I returned the printer to Amazon. I think it may have had a defective network card, but I can’t be sure.

 

In any event, I replaced the Canon with an Epson R2000 which, unlike the Canon, established a reliable network connection that it has maintained ever since. I think the print output on the Epson is somewhat better than I obtained with the Canon, but, to be truthful, it’s really splitting hairs.

 

As I'm sure you're aware, what seems to make more difference in the output, especially with large, 13 x 19 prints, is the paper one uses. I’ve tested Epson, Canon and Hahnemuhle papers by printing identical outputs on each, and there is a very distinct and discernible difference. I’m particularly impressed with Hahnemuhle Baryta glossy paper (which is more of a luster than a gloss, that’s for sure). The other thing I really like about using Hahnemuhle paper is that ICC profiles are readily available through their website.

 

Hope this helps!

 

PS. A set of eight genuine Epson ink cartridges for the R2000 is available through Amazon for about $25 (much cheaper than OEM but with no manufacturer packaging).

[pedaes]

Bill - unless you need A2 I can recommend the Epson R3000.

[Jeff S]

Again not a direct answer to your request, but I use both Canson papers you mention with my Epson 3800. I've used custom profiles using a friend's i1 spectrophotometer, and recently started using Chromix's ColorValet Pro profiling service (unlimited profiles for 18 months for only $179 total). Both yield wonderful results....when I do my job right.

 

I don't think you can go wrong with the 3880, which I've lately seen advertised with substantial rebates. Don't know if that indicates a newer model on the way, or just holiday savings. I'd love for Epson to produce a 3900, with the 4900 ink set, but I suspect there's not enough room in the current footprint.

 

I have no experience with Canon, but the same friend has printed on both papers using Canon (IPF 5100) and Epson (various 4000 series) printers. He liked the results from both, especially after he learned to maximize the potential of each.

 

I'm sure you know to check other specs and features, e.g., ink cartridge size and cost, feed options, etc.

 

Hope that helps a bit.

 

Jeff

[FPB]

Bob, Pedaes, Jeff - thanks for your input.

I will extend my search a bit and look for the Epson R2000 / R3000 too. Seems to be a matter of how many prints I'm going to do in a year. Cheaper inks sets and printers compared to the 3880. And judging them to the 3880 may be really splitting hairs. The more compelling task is on my side I suppose.

I will just see what the Canson profiles deliver in PS soft proof just to have an indication. I printed on Hahnemühle paper in my 7800 time, great stuff. Just wanted to see what Canson has on the market.

 

Thanks for your help !

Best

Bill

[Jeff S]

Cheaper inks sets and printers compared to the 3880. And judging them to the 3880 may be really splitting hairs.

 

Consider that the R3000 has cartridges with 25.9ml capacity, while the 3880 cartridges are 80ml. Don't believe the manufacturer specs on shelf life....they'll last a long time as long as you shake them up and run a test print every so often if you're not otherwise printing regularly. The cost/ml is much less expensive with the 3880, especially if you find a supplier with a good deal to start. [The 3880 of course can print to 17" compared to 13" for the R3000, but the latter has roll paper feed not available on the 3880.]

 

Another less expensive option is to buy Cone color inks for the Epsons. This is the same company that produces the black ink sets for Piezography users.

 

BTW, Hahnemuhle papers were my go-to brand...until I tried the Cansons...although I still use the former occasionally. Ilford Gold Fibre Silk is also nice for my all-around color use.

 

Jeff

[woorob]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Jeff,

 

I'm intrigued by the link you provided to the ColorValet custom profiling service.

 

Have you been able to notice a significant improvement in print output using their custom profiling service as opposed to the ICC profiles provided by some of the paper manufacturers?

 

Thanks.

[Jeff S]

Have you been able to notice a significant improvement in print output using their custom profiling service as opposed to the ICC profiles provided by some of the paper manufacturers?

 

I never use the profiles provided by the manufacturer, preferring to custom profile. For several years I had a good friend profile my papers on my gear using his i1 spectrophotometer, and the results were terrific. When he upgraded his software, they got better still (He's also very skilled at maximizing the potential of his gear.)

 

About 6 months ago I decided to stop bothering him with this since he and his wife just had a new baby. I was going to buy my own equipment to do so, but learned about the Chromix option. I decided to try it and have been very satisfied; the profiles are equivalent to what I had been getting from my friend. It's not surprising, as they use an even higher end i1 spectrophotometer than his, and they are specialists in how to use it.

 

The profiles from the manufacturers are ok, but nothing beats custom profiling on the actual equipment used IMO, provided the gear and technique is up to the task. Keep in mind that these can be subtle changes, but important for those who like to discriminate and want to print optimally through a disciplined workflow; the profile is but one step in that regard. The part about "the chain and its weakest link" still applies.

 

Jeff