Canon Program Pro 1000 17" Printer: Initial Impressions

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I also had problems of blotching and edge stains with my Epson R3000, which I traced to the waste ink "well" and foam strip beneath the print head. This seems to be a major design flaw with (some?) Epson printers, which I hope I have solved with a third party plumbed-in waste ink tank - we shall see.

How does Canon deal with the same issue? Or does Canon allow gloss and matte black to be used in parallel without a changeover purge routine?

 

The R3000 was known to have issues.....it, along with the 4900 (clogs), were two problematic Epson machines, unlike their other typically well reviewed  printers.  I've never had an issue with my 3800 in 7 years....but that's also due to my learning how to use it to avoid any issues (like skewing or blotching as I described above).  

 

The P600, according at least to every review I've read so far, is a superb replacement for the R3000 for 13" prints.   If it runs like like the 3800 and 3880, it should be a gem.

 

Jeff

[LocalHero1953]

The R3000 was known to have issues.....it, along with the 4900 (clogs), were two problematic Epson machines, unlike their other typically well reviewed  printers.  I've never had an issue with my 3800 in 7 years....but that's also due to my learning how to use it to avoid any issues (like skewing or blotching as I described above).  

 

The P600, according at least to every review I've read so far, is a superb replacement for the R3000 for 13" prints.   If it runs like like the 3800 and 3880, it should be a gem.

 

Jeff

I would have got the R3800 when I had the choice, but it is just too big for where I wanted to place it.

I have had no problems with skewing on normal feed or the fine art paper feed.

[Advertisement]

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

[Jeff S]

The 3800 (no 'R') or 3880 is about the same size as the R3000....maybe 3" wider.   I tried to encourage folks here to go for the slightly bigger, and proven reliable machine, particularly when discounts and dealer rebates had effectively neutralized prices.   The real difference in printer size comes with the move up to the 4900.....that's a beast by comparison to the 3880 (or new P800).

 

The R3000 issues, AFAIK, didn't relate to skewing.....these became well known on discussion groups.  Printers are one of those products (like Leica digital cameras and lenses) that warrant, for me at least, some time before buying to determine any bugs/issues.  Some products develop a great reputation, some not.  So this thread is useful for me....I like 'beta' testers.  

 

Jeff

[sanyasi]

Here a couple of follow-up points:

 

A.  According to Canon, use of the ink from the Matte Black cartridge is not limited to matte papers, which explains why I had to replace the cartridge after only printing 3 or 4 prints on matte paper.  From what I can tell, the system isn't like the older ones where there is a switching of ink cartridges when you switch from photo to matte paper.  The tech said matte ink was used even when you were using photo paper.  It is all about mixing the inks to create the colors and tones.

 

B.  The ink markings on corners and sides largely disappeared, but last night I had a photo that printed with corner and edge marks, which is why I called tech support today--I wanted to get to the bottom of the issue.  The tech had me adjust the head height (setting it from low to high) and turn paper abrasion from off to on, and so far the problem has disappeared. We will see.

 

C.  Somewhere I read someone who pointed to the maintenance tank as a possible source of those markings.  The tech said the tank is in the back and would not be cause of that sort of problem.

 

D.  You probably could clean the Epson printers, but the Canon documentation is clearer to me.  There are separate procedures for the print heads, the paper roller, and bottom plate cleaning, which is the inside of the printer.  Instructions are detailed.  The tech said you should not have to clean the printer if you use it regularly, but I am always suspect about that sort of statement.

 

E.  I printed one photograph today that I could never get to print properly on the Epson 3880.  The orange in the stand-up bass was always gray and flat.  The Canon printed it correctly.  In fairness, I was using the Fine Art Baryta on the Epson and the Baryta FA on the Canon--I ran out of the Fine Art so I need to reorder--so that could explain the different result, but based on soft proofing, I think the Canon has a wider gamut than the Epson, so the paper might not make a big difference.

 

If there are further developments, I will update.

[Jeff S]

I mentioned that the edge marks were likely due to 2 factors....printing close to the paper edge in the first place (some feed options handle this better), and the platen gap (Epson terminology) and related settings.   No real surprise there.  But there may be another important factor, and that's using matte black ink on glossy papers; this is generally not recommended since it can lead to bleeding and running.  I'm sure Canon looked into this, but it is curious if the rep is correct, as paper types vary.

 

Regarding color comparisons between printers, one obviously can't draw conclusions without apples to apples paper type and, even then, different profiles and various other print settings can potentially make a significant difference.  The Epson 4900 (and other big Epson machines) do, however, have extra ink colors (including orange) compared to the 3880 that might account for your disappointment....or not.  I haven't looked closely into specs....gamut or otherwise....between machines, but there are many variables leading to print results.

 

Jeff

Edited January 12, 2016 by Jeff S

[sanyasi]

I don't disagree about variables and color.  What I have noticed already is that in soft proofing, I see a lot less out of gamut indication with the Canon.  Could be the color palette of these photos.  Time will tell.

 

my impression was that the rep was suggesting that matte black is a name given to that "color" rather than what I would think of as ink produced for matte paper.  I'd like to hear the story from someone further up the Canon chain, although I have now had 3 separate techs and all 3 were great.

[sanyasi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, this is a new first.  I just read that my printer has been recalled because it may leak ink from the inside to the outside.  It will be replaced with a new printer, according to the announcement at the end of January.  The saga continues.  Or should I say, "The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly." It will be interesting to see how Canon handles the exchange, particularly the ink.  Wonder if I will get a new set of cartridges.

Edited January 15, 2016 by sanyasi

[Jeff S]

The 3800 (no 'R') or 3880 is about the same size as the R3000....maybe 3" wider.   I tried to encourage folks here to go for the slightly bigger, and proven reliable machine, particularly when discounts and dealer rebates had effectively neutralized prices.   The real difference in printer size comes with the move up to the 4900.....that's a beast by comparison to the 3880 (or new P800).

 

The R3000 issues, AFAIK, didn't relate to skewing.....these became well known on discussion groups.  Printers are one of those products (like Leica digital cameras and lenses) that warrant, for me at least, some time before buying to determine any bugs/issues.  Some products develop a great reputation, some not.  So this thread is useful for me....I like 'beta' testers.  

 

Jeff

 

As I noted...

 

Jeff

[sanyasi]

I don't feel like a beta tester.  Any company can have a problem.  Given that the recall was for a specific lot, it appears to be a manufacturing rather than a design issue (unlike my diesel VW, which is a design/fraud problem).  

 

The Press Release indicated that a solution would be available by the end of January 2016.  I called today (February 2, 2016).  Canon took my name and address, and said I would receive a new printer (not refurbished) with a full set of new inks within 3 or 4 business days.  I can take the inks out of my existing printer and use those too.  I will also receive a prepaid UPS label, so i will just ship the old printer back to Canon.  Interestingly, they did not ask for a credit card number, so they trust me to send the old printer back, which I will do.

 

I might add:  The last print I made had random ink drips throughout the print.  I did the regular (as opposed to power) head clean, and the last two prints have been perfect.

 

Still happy with the printer and Canon customer service.

[Jeff S]

To each his own.....a lot of Leica users are happy to be beta testers too regarding manufacturing issues....remember strap lugs and various other issues.  I prefer to let the early dust settle in all cases....returning and setting up a new machine would be a hassle for me, regardless.

 

Jeff

[sanyasi]

I started this thread by offering a hands on review of the Pro 1000.  I evaluate a printer by ease of use and my visual impression of the output.  Like most camera equipment, I don't care about all the technical details.  For those of you who get into that stuff, you might want to check out a review that was posted today on Luminous Landscape (now a paid site--I think $12 per year).  The reviewer is Mark Segal.  He has done extensive testing, he does comparisons between the Canon and the Epson 4900 and Epson p800.  If you like measurements, numbers, test devices, and samples, you will love this lengthy review.

 

When all is said and done, he seems to say that the Epson 4900 is still the king of gamut when it comes to the stats, but that the prints are much closer in appearance than the stats suggest, with different photographers having differing preferences. He really liked the feed system, as well as the software.  At the end of the day, he may get great pleasure out of all the testing, but his overall conclusion is similar to mine:  The Canon 1000 is a great printer that makes great prints.

 

https://luminous-landscape.com/canon-imageprograf-pro-1000-printer-review/  There is also a 10 minute video which I haven't watched yet.

[Jeff S]

Mark Segal's main complaint about the Canon is its current limitation on print length (maximum print size 17x 23.4 inches), thereby not allowing 16x24 prints, which maintains a full frame 35mm aspect ratio.  This also eliminates any potential for extended panoramics.   The Epson P800, by comparison, has roll paper capability, with no such limitation.  Of course this may not be an issue for many users, but something he noted.

 

He also noted that it's way too early, as it is with the Epson, to determine how the machine holds up over the longer term....clog issues, mechanical reliability, etc.

 

And, most importantly (which is why I like his review), he cautions folks that the main difference in output between these sophisticated machines (the Canon, the various new Epsons, etc) will be dictated by the capabilities and techniques of the user, not by the machine specs.  As has always been the case....darkroom or lightroom.

 

BTW, the modest $12 annual cost for LuLa is the best deal in town.  Apart from new reviews like this, the subscription provides unlimited access to the LuLa archives, including many hours of videos on technical topics (printing, matting and framing, Photoshop and Lightroom tutorials, etc), travel videos (all of Art Wolfe's Travels to the Edge episodes), interviews with many photographers and experts, and lots more.  I have no vested interest...just happen to like it.

 

Jeff

Edited March 11, 2016 by Jeff S

[Guest]

He also noted that it's way too early, as it is with the Epson, to determine how the machine holds up over the longer term....clog issues, mechanical reliability, etc. (Quote)

 

I spoke to the man from Epson at a Calumet road show event where the P800 was being shown prior to it being readily available.

My understanding was that the printer from a mechanical point of view was the same as the 3880. They had introduced WiFi and the new ink set ,the rest being cosmetic. I have used the printer for 9 months and am more than happy with it.The roll feed is built like a tank.No reason to think the printer will be any less reliable than the 3880. The ink set is very good especially the new Black.

Brianp

[Jeff S]

Two-edged sword....yes, I'm sure Epson tried to be very conservative in design and function changes from 3880 to P800 (the profits are in the new ink sets....the machines are just the delivery device).....so reliability will hopefully be consistent.  Conversely, there were no dramatic changes (roll paper aside) to improve, for example, the process and ink waste from switching blacks, nothing novel in terms of additional cartridges in the same relative footprint (either extra black or extra colors as in some of the more expensive sister machines) as some hoped from the next generation.

 

The good news is that Canon has stepped up their game, so Epson can't go to sleep for as long as they did prior to recent updates.  I'm still curious about any P-series replacement for the troubled 4900.  I'm due for a new printer one of these days, and I'd like another option to consider without going to the much bigger 24" and above models.

 

One innovation Epson did sneak in with the P800 is that it now incorporates the technology to essentially prevent use of third party inks (like Piezo and Cone color inks)....the P600 didn't yet have that design.  Epson is serious about selling those inks.

 

Jeff 

Edited March 13, 2016 by Jeff S

[Exodies]

Why do the blacks have to be swapped? It doesn't happen when switching from yellow to cyan.

[Jeff S]

Photo to matte black and vice versa...lines need to be cleared with Epson...rather than running separately capable channels.  One can run either of these blacks...depending on glossy or matte paper... along with Light and Light Light black without any switching.

 

Jeff

Edited March 13, 2016 by Jeff S

[Exodies]

Is it because they don't expect you to use them together and so can save on pipes?

[Jeff S]

Well, the cynic might conclude that it forces more ink usage.  Don't really know.

 

Jeff

[Guest]

One innovation Epson did sneak in with the P800 is that it now incorporates the technology to essentially prevent use of third party inks (like Piezo and Cone color inks)....the P600 didn't yet have that design.  Epson is serious about selling those inks.

 

interesting point which I missed / never picked up on.Thank you for the info Jeff.

 

I was considering buying the piezography black and white system for my Epson 2880 but the Jury is out after seeing the B and W results from the P800. The problem with putting 3rd party ink in a new Epson printer is the warranty is immediately gone. My P800 came with a warranty extension to 3 years . I am sure that the the aftermarket ink people will have come up with a work around before long if they are serious about selling ink, as I suspect the P800 will not be the only P series printer which prevents 3rd party ink being used.

BrianP

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Jeff S]

Jon Cone knows Epsons inside and out....literally.   So I wouldn't worry about using his inks with printers that he validates as compatible (either for Piezo or color inks).

 

But he notes that the P800 anti-3rd party technology appears locked down.....kind of like Apple encryption....so I wouldn't anticipate that getting solved anytime soon.  Meanwhile he's already marketing his system for the P600, and for many other Epsons.  

 

One could also buy a used or refurbished machine dedicated for Piezo.  If I get a new Epson, I may just give my 3800 a tune and keep it for that purpose.....but not before I try b/w with the new standard inks.

 

Jeff