The only really interesting thing would be a worthy successor for the ET 8550. And/or adding additional professional features to the ET 8550 like allowing the driverpackage to import new mediatype (maybe thirdparty ICC paper profiles, and I don't talk color profiles by that) and so on. I bought the ET 8550 after watching like all of your videos about it and tbh the printer offers everything a hobby photographer could wish for. Professional tools, different paper sizes and superior printquality since there actually are premium paper producers that offer ICC profiles for the papers they sell. I feel like everything that comes after the 8550 is bound to have a jump in costs compared to the 8550 and therefor is not sustainable for people, who don't make money out of their prints. PS.: Thanks Keith for existing and doing what you are doing. There is literally no other channel, that does this crosssection of topics on different printers mixed with a professional and enthusiast look on things. You and your channel are a gem.
Thanks - I did actually speak to a few paper suppliers when I first got the 8550, and pretty much only got the "this isn't a printer for people using our papers" response. I took that as a challenge!
@@KeithCooper Well it seems it did stick with them. Hahnemühle delivers pdf files with their ICC profiles, where they describe which media type setting they used for their testing. I also found photolux to be a reliable source for ICC profiles in Germany. They sell their own paper which is in part made by Hahnemühle, some by others. They have a site where they link many paper companies, who offer ICC profiles for the 8550 and they offer their ICC profile making service for 70€. If you aren't already satisfied with the profiles you can find with a lot of paper producers, you're able to request ICC profiles for specific papers for a relatively fair fee.
I'd be over the moon with an Epson ET-8580 (essentially the ET-8550 stretched to 17"). Given how happy and indeed surprised I am by my five-weeks-new 8550 😊
Same with me, just bought the 8550 after watching Keith’s video and I would love if there would be a 17 inch version. But I think this will be one of the things not to be happening…😢
Thanks to you, Keith, I bought a EPSON ET-8550. It is a really good printer for an amateur photographer. Very inexpensive compare to my old Epson 1400. It is very good quality, even if I know that the prints will not last to the next century :)
Hi Keith. Love the channel. Just wondering- I am still using an Epson xp 900. Has printing moved on so much since it's launch that i shopuld consider replacing it. Plus ink costs are hard to swallow. Are ink tank printers really cheaper? interested in your opinion.
Thanks Quality wise - improvements are not that obvious especially when you have full profiles and the like. Ink tank printers [for some people] remove some of the 'ink cost' inhibitions towards experimenting. I've had enough people tell me this to say it matters to some
@@KeithCooper I will persevere with it until it gives up the ghost having one or two issues with the screen and the foam pads are sometimes sodden with ink. Probably not helping with the costs. I bought new at launch. When it breaks I will probably get a photo quality ink tank model. Which one depends on availability at the time but the 8550 is on the list. Thanks again.
Thank you for your videos! They are very enjoyable and educational at the same time. Do you have a video on storing prints, archiving them, preserving them? If not, a video like that would be highly appreciated.
Thanks. Not a subject I have covered since I don't store large numbers of print, but... The table I'm using in many of my videos is actually a chart drawer [2nd hand from an office equipment warehouse] it has six drawers going back the full depth. I have another one elsewhere in the house. large prints are stored flat, interleaved with museum grade tissue paper [in A1 sized sheets]. Since most print were from roll paper, this gets rid of the curl over time as well.
I would like to buy the Cannon Prograf 1000 now that the successor 1100 has been shipping, however I worry about the availability of the inks in the coming years
A reasonable concern - I'd expect good supplies for at least seven years [likely longer] One area I'd have perhaps more concern is Canon not supporting it with 'current' drivers at some point in the future - that happens with any product, but Canon seem less keen than Epson in this respect
Keith, love your site and RUclips videos. As a very long time pro photographer and serious printer, I always look to your opinions and reviews with great interest. I have had multiple pro Canon and Epson pigment printers in sizes from 13 inch to 44 inch, plus a few dye ink set "photo" printers as well. Now, when I am "semi-retired" and thinking about the legacy of some of my editorial work from the 70's through the 80's which have some historical and artistic merit, I am thinking about doing some serious serious printing of these legacy images for multiple purposes. A couple of years ago, I jumped at the Epson 8550 and got it at its very early availability, a little before you reviewed it. I had a feeling from its specs that it would be a market disrupter, because, of course, for most people, the real financial barrier to serious and necessarily higher volume printing is not the cost of the printer, but the almost ridiculous cost of the ink in those nasty little cartridges. The 8550 ink set, while not as "diverse" and capable of making the widest gamut among printers, is, nonetheless, remarkable among dye set printers and apparently not too shabby for print longevity as well. I am very happy with the 8550, but I need to move on now. This all brings me to my point, as I would like to be able to purchase something fairly soon, and, unlike in my past, when my work afforded very large budgets for things like printers and ink, in my financially reduced state I am looking for the ever elusive bargain. However, due to the seriousness of what I feel I need to print, I am looking to go beyond my current 8550 in both print size and gamut potential, as well as having the likely extra advantage of pigment permanence. So, I am considering the new Canon 1100, but am concerned with the ink costs over time. I doubt whether I will be able to find an analog to the 8550 in a larger serious higher gamut pigment printer. However, if say, Epson or Canon would produce something like an 8-color ink tank (not cartridge) pigment printer in 17" or 20" format with an excellent color gamut, excellent B&W printing capability and good paper handling, pricing it in the $1,400.00 - $1,600.00 range, it would likely break the market and sell in numbers that would dwarf what they sell now in their prosumer and pro lines. Yes, they would lose some money in profits from the better ink pricing, but I think they would likely at least make most or all of that up in much higher printer sales and higher volume of ink sales. If I knew the comparative sales figures for the 8550, it would help to prove or disprove my speculation, as it would hint at the potential available. What do you think?
Thanks... Unfortunately, at the moment, I see no signs of bigger+better ink tank printer from Canon or Epson. That said, the P5300 takes 200ml per cart - it just costs more to start with...
Hi Keith. I’m curious if you have any experience with the Canon Pro-2600/4600/6600 printers? I am purchasing a 4600 soon, I think, and value your opinion.
Not directly - waiting for a go on one. Inks wise, it's the same as the 1100 I'm testing and for most other aspects it's not greatly different from the 2000 I had here for testing some time ago [see my detailed written review] www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon-imageprograf-pro-2000-printer-review/
Hi Keith, for many years I have been hoping for a longlasting 13" pigment ink tank (bottle) printer in the hope of reducing printing costs because, it has to be said, many people have stopped printing due to the high cost of ink in particular. Unfortunately, the manufacturers do not seem to be doing us this favor and continue to sell their filled cartridges at a high price level. A few years ago, we switched from an HP Color Laserjet to an Epson Ink Tank Printer for office printing (also because of the toner particle emissions), which has significantly reduced printing costs. In FineArt printing this will probably remain an unfulfilled wish.
Hi Keith Im in the market for a 13 “ or 17” inkjet printer for making high quality fine art prints. The ones I’m considering in Canada right now are the Epson P700 or p900. But ive read about some buyers saying they have problems with their reliability. These reviewers mention that their printers stopped working soon after the 1 year warranty ran out. I haven’t seen much on your channel about reliability and durability of Epson printers. Any experience with that? The other option is to go with the Canon Pro1100 or the Pro300. Apparently Canon printers are more durable and reliable. Is that true? But you also said Canon driver support for Mac users is not great. I need a reliable printer that will work with my MacBook running the latest operating system. So do you recommend the Epson or Canon? Id appreciate your input. Cheers!
I don't get to do any longer term testing - the printers are loans and I'm not allowed to turn the house into a printer warehouse... ;-) What 'reviewers' are you referring to - I don't know of anyone, who I'd call a printer reviewer, who has noticed this? Sales reviews for example give no indication of the competence or otherwise of the person making the claims? I don't see any particular differences between Epson/Canon, other than Canon printers tend to be heavier... The Canon ones [300/1000/1100] are more costly to run if you don't print often and include the costs of ink used for maintenance. I'd prefer the 900 over the 700, just for the flexibility of being able to do A2, and for the lower cost of ink - don't bother with the roll feed unit... If you need roll get a P5300 See www.redrivercatalog.com/rr/cost-of-inkjet-printing.html
I'm disappointed Epson still used their "Print Automate" software for their T series, I was going to buy one to expand our business but after the troubles we had with the T5200PS not being recognised by Print Automate because it only works with regular and dual roll models (official response from Epson) we opted for a HP Pagewide XL second hand, for about £3k we bought a £25-28k machine. And surprise me not, their new driver even supports the oldest XL variant which came out I believe 7 years ago.
Hi I don't know where else to ask about this. A few days ago I randomly decided to dip an inkjet print I'd made in water, and let it dry while being pressed under a book. The Print now has significantly deeper blacks, but has otherwise not degraded in any way (fine grain is still just as visible). The print had dried for a few days before I dipped it. Is this coincidence? Or have I stumbled upon something potentially relevant? I'm really confused. edit: I was using a cheap epson ecotank printer, as well as high-gloss photo paper
Ink cost is a small part of doing prints. Paper - good paper - is not cheap, and you want to test on the target paper even if the size is smaller. I guess I don't see the obsession with ink cost. Especially when across the pond the ET8500 is more than double the price of the Pro 200 (and paper profiles are less available).
Yes - that's why I try and make the distinction. It is however an important factor for a sizeable number of people [I'm not one of them BTW] Canon heavily discounts the pro-200 and before that the pro-100 in some markets
In my experience, those that debate should either buy a printer or not at all. Their ability (and I include myself in this) is not good enough to discern the difference between the latest and greatest or the preceding model. Those with the ability either know to wait, or more likely realise that their target audience [customer] wouldn't be able to identify the difference between the latest or preceding model so will simply buy a "good" printer when their existing one expires, whether there's a new model coming or not.
@@KeithCooper I'm still on a D500 and D800 depending on what I'm using it for. I can't really outperform them, so instead bought some different lenses to go with it :) Nobody has ever criticised the image quality either - never got my head round the "must upgrade to the latest" attitude, how can something go from being the best ever to needing upgrading?!
Hi, a bit of a side note. Lightroom Classic, MacOs15, Canon Pro-1. I tried to print today, and guess what it looks like Adobe / Apple have broken printing again :(. Like earlier in the year the page set up doesn’t show the installed printers and only basic paper sizes. This time around I can’t get a print produced. So a quick question - what would you use to replace the print module from Lightroom? - When it works it works really well for me. I also have a canon G series thanks to your wonderful review and coverage of the ICC profile issue. Prints great but only A4 max. Any thoughts?
Yes - 15 has more issues :-( More likely Canon has given up on another 'old' printer. One reason I'll never update any Mac I use for serious work until I need to Does Canon PPL support the printer? I don't ever use lightroom though - I've used Photoshop for ~25 years :-)
@@KeithCooper Hi thanks for the quick reply. I think the pro 1 may well be at the end of the road. Next “wide” printer will likely be an eco tank version as that is more than enough for my needs. The pro 1 has been excellent for B&W prints, so that is my only hesitation in stepping back to dye inks but your reviews do make it look doable.. The real concern is I do like Editing with LR, so I probably need to dust off my PS printing understanding as for now that maybe the only way I can get prints out for now. Hopefully things will get sorted ASAP on the general print issues from LR…
Hey Keith, very interesting points about the market segmentation with Canon. It's a very annoying thing honestly. It is expected from any brand or manufacturer it's how they make money they are not the charity. However CANON is pushing it way too far. For instance same thing with their RF mount system, and trying so hard to keep it closed to third party Lenses manufacturer like Sigma. About printers I am desperate to see an equivalent of the G650 in A3 size. I will tend to think that they are better than Epson in quite a few metrics, and they would really kick them in the bum with such a printer. I have bought two g650 for my work. Because I wanted a backup and once I twice the first printer I had failed and I sent it back to the shop. However now I'm frustrated to not being able to print A3+ and might sell those and get an Epson 8550. Believe me when I say, This is just to say us so many of us, I'm, we are big canon fan and I've tried really hard to avoid buying Epson for the problems at least they used to have in the past which is: terrible ink consumption and waste when doing maintenance. With ink tanks printers it matters less however. I am also really keen to try the TC20M which seems to be quite excellent for photos and can print really big and has ink tanks. However for my work on location it's way too big. I just really really need and I think many people do need a TC20M that's aimed at printing A3+ and he's quite smaller and portable. O please canon! Please make sense and hear your customers and fans needs we only want to buy more of your GREAT products we do not want to buy Epson 😂😂😂, we are only asking to give you more money! ;-)))) For that matter if Canon's products quality was not so great I would have been gone for a long time because their market micro-segmentation and close-minded policies are absolutely shocking sometimes...
Thanks, but it's not 'not recommended' at all... Just that bigger printers tend to have more limited options [borders and the like] compared with small ones for small sheets.
Well, I do have detailed [written] reviews of the P7500 and mechanically similar PRO-2000. The immediate difference is that the P7500 has a straight through print path. The pro-2600 is more oriented to 'production' use - roll swapping for example. It's paper handling is more akin to the P6500/8500 Print quality though, is something which means something different to everyone who ever asks ;-) I do hope to get a chance to try a 2600 before ong...
If you are a hobbyist and not wealthy, don't ever buy a photo printer would be my advice. Unless a printer exists which allows me to print something today and print something 6 months from now and the printer stills works fine, I would just not bother. I would rather spend the money having a print company do it for me, let them deal with the hassle of maintaining the thing.
An option to consider if you really print that rarely. That said, my info here is definitely not aimed at that market, but at people who do want to print...
Yes if you don't want to print don't buy a printer I think that's trying to smash an open door if we take a metaphor. I can assure you and I can tell when you write a comment like this you have not tried an ink tank printer yet in 2024. You haven't. If you did you'd change your mind. Unless again you don't like photography and then you don't like printing. In which case you want to do something else like playing golf or darts 😂
@@romatou18 I certainly hope you're right. I have a 24" Epson 7880 which I purchased in 2008. Great printer, but it's just really ornery when it's not printing on a regular basis. Ink being expensive I can understand, I just get annoyed to have to run three or more cleaning cycles to get a good nozzle check after it sits for a couple weeks. If that's a thing of the past then hallelujah.
@@TheNathanMChannel I have had an Epson 2400, R3000, SCP600 and now SC-P900. The first two were a problem with blocked nozzles if you left the printer for any time without printing. The P900 is streets ahead of the early ones even the P600 in respect of the need for cleaning cycles and blocked nozzles. I notice the P900 has a specific cleaning function called flushing ( which is automatic) that prevents thickening of the ink in the nozzles and discards that ink periodically. I don't know if it was present in the early printers but if it was it didn't work well!! However I do print regularly at least once a week and more often every three to four days.
For those near London and not wanting a printer any time soon, maybe... First time I'll likely not be visiting this show [under whatever name] for over 20 years
![Epson vs Canon. What's the best 17 inch printer for you? P900 vs PRO-1100 vs P5300 [P5370]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/48g3F23eick/mqdefault.jpg)
![Epson vs Canon. What's the best 17 inch printer for you? P900 vs PRO-1100 vs P5300 [P5370]](/img/tr.png)
The only really interesting thing would be a worthy successor for the ET 8550. And/or adding additional professional features to the ET 8550 like allowing the driverpackage to import new mediatype (maybe thirdparty ICC paper profiles, and I don't talk color profiles by that) and so on. I bought the ET 8550 after watching like all of your videos about it and tbh the printer offers everything a hobby photographer could wish for. Professional tools, different paper sizes and superior printquality since there actually are premium paper producers that offer ICC profiles for the papers they sell. I feel like everything that comes after the 8550 is bound to have a jump in costs compared to the 8550 and therefor is not sustainable for people, who don't make money out of their prints.
PS.: Thanks Keith for existing and doing what you are doing. There is literally no other channel, that does this crosssection of topics on different printers mixed with a professional and enthusiast look on things. You and your channel are a gem.
Thanks - I did actually speak to a few paper suppliers when I first got the 8550, and pretty much only got the "this isn't a printer for people using our papers" response.
I took that as a challenge!
@@KeithCooper Well it seems it did stick with them. Hahnemühle delivers pdf files with their ICC profiles, where they describe which media type setting they used for their testing. I also found photolux to be a reliable source for ICC profiles in Germany. They sell their own paper which is in part made by Hahnemühle, some by others. They have a site where they link many paper companies, who offer ICC profiles for the 8550 and they offer their ICC profile making service for 70€. If you aren't already satisfied with the profiles you can find with a lot of paper producers, you're able to request ICC profiles for specific papers for a relatively fair fee.
I'd be over the moon with an Epson ET-8580 (essentially the ET-8550 stretched to 17"). Given how happy and indeed surprised I am by my five-weeks-new 8550 😊
Seems an easy win, but I'm not in Japan ;-)
Same with me, just bought the 8550 after watching Keith’s video and I would love if there would be a 17 inch version. But I think this will be one of the things not to be happening…😢
@@KeithCooper Exactly!
Thanks to you, Keith, I bought a EPSON ET-8550. It is a really good printer for an amateur photographer. Very inexpensive compare to my old Epson 1400. It is very good quality, even if I know that the prints will not last to the next century :)
Glad to have been of help!
Ive recently bought the et 8550 and i love it so much. maybe one day i will explore a much bigger format printer.
Excellent!
Thanks so much Keith for your video,. An awesome overview, thank you!!!!
Glad it was of interest!
I'm really looking forward towards the 17" printer comparison you alluded to. Starting my research into printing and really appreciate all you do.
Thanks - I've a video about making long panoramic prints tomorrow
Great insights as usual! Thank you!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Ive heard about ALICE COOPER but you Keith! You rules too... fantastic job you are doing to us!!
I'l not be singing though... :-)
@@KeithCooper
Hi Keith. Love the channel. Just wondering- I am still using an Epson xp 900. Has printing moved on so much since it's launch that i shopuld consider replacing it. Plus ink costs are hard to swallow. Are ink tank printers really cheaper? interested in your opinion.
Thanks
Quality wise - improvements are not that obvious especially when you have full profiles and the like.
Ink tank printers [for some people] remove some of the 'ink cost' inhibitions towards experimenting. I've had enough people tell me this to say it matters to some
@@KeithCooper I will persevere with it until it gives up the ghost having one or two issues with the screen and the foam pads are sometimes sodden with ink. Probably not helping with the costs. I bought new at launch. When it breaks I will probably get a photo quality ink tank model. Which one depends on availability at the time but the 8550 is on the list. Thanks again.
thanks, i enjoyed this very much. you get across the "making good prints" attitude. that's as important as the tech.
Thanks - that's what it's about...
Thank you for your videos! They are very enjoyable and educational at the same time. Do you have a video on storing prints, archiving them, preserving them? If not, a video like that would be highly appreciated.
Thanks. Not a subject I have covered since I don't store large numbers of print, but...
The table I'm using in many of my videos is actually a chart drawer [2nd hand from an office equipment warehouse] it has six drawers going back the full depth. I have another one elsewhere in the house. large prints are stored flat, interleaved with museum grade tissue paper [in A1 sized sheets]. Since most print were from roll paper, this gets rid of the curl over time as well.
I would like to buy the Cannon Prograf 1000 now that the successor 1100 has been shipping, however I worry about the availability of the inks in the coming years
A reasonable concern - I'd expect good supplies for at least seven years [likely longer] One area I'd have perhaps more concern is Canon not supporting it with 'current' drivers at some point in the future - that happens with any product, but Canon seem less keen than Epson in this respect
Keith, love your site and RUclips videos. As a very long time pro photographer and serious printer, I always look to your opinions and reviews with great interest. I have had multiple pro Canon and Epson pigment printers in sizes from 13 inch to 44 inch, plus a few dye ink set "photo" printers as well. Now, when I am "semi-retired" and thinking about the legacy of some of my editorial work from the 70's through the 80's which have some historical and artistic merit, I am thinking about doing some serious serious printing of these legacy images for multiple purposes. A couple of years ago, I jumped at the Epson 8550 and got it at its very early availability, a little before you reviewed it. I had a feeling from its specs that it would be a market disrupter, because, of course, for most people, the real financial barrier to serious and necessarily higher volume printing is not the cost of the printer, but the almost ridiculous cost of the ink in those nasty little cartridges. The 8550 ink set, while not as "diverse" and capable of making the widest gamut among printers, is, nonetheless, remarkable among dye set printers and apparently not too shabby for print longevity as well. I am very happy with the 8550, but I need to move on now.
This all brings me to my point, as I would like to be able to purchase something fairly soon, and, unlike in my past, when my work afforded very large budgets for things like printers and ink, in my financially reduced state I am looking for the ever elusive bargain. However, due to the seriousness of what I feel I need to print, I am looking to go beyond my current 8550 in both print size and gamut potential, as well as having the likely extra advantage of pigment permanence. So, I am considering the new Canon 1100, but am concerned with the ink costs over time. I doubt whether I will be able to find an analog to the 8550 in a larger serious higher gamut pigment printer. However, if say, Epson or Canon would produce something like an 8-color ink tank (not cartridge) pigment printer in 17" or 20" format with an excellent color gamut, excellent B&W printing capability and good paper handling, pricing it in the $1,400.00 - $1,600.00 range, it would likely break the market and sell in numbers that would dwarf what they sell now in their prosumer and pro lines. Yes, they would lose some money in profits from the better ink pricing, but I think they would likely at least make most or all of that up in much higher printer sales and higher volume of ink sales. If I knew the comparative sales figures for the 8550, it would help to prove or disprove my speculation, as it would hint at the potential available. What do you think?
Thanks...
Unfortunately, at the moment, I see no signs of bigger+better ink tank printer from Canon or Epson.
That said, the P5300 takes 200ml per cart - it just costs more to start with...
Hi Keith. I’m curious if you have any experience with the Canon Pro-2600/4600/6600 printers? I am purchasing a 4600 soon, I think, and value your opinion.
Not directly - waiting for a go on one.
Inks wise, it's the same as the 1100 I'm testing and for most other aspects it's not greatly different from the 2000 I had here for testing some time ago [see my detailed written review]
www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon-imageprograf-pro-2000-printer-review/
Hi Keith, for many years I have been hoping for a longlasting 13" pigment ink tank (bottle) printer in the hope of reducing printing costs because, it has to be said, many people have stopped printing due to the high cost of ink in particular.
Unfortunately, the manufacturers do not seem to be doing us this favor and continue to sell their filled cartridges at a high price level.
A few years ago, we switched from an HP Color Laserjet to an Epson Ink Tank Printer for office printing (also because of the toner particle emissions), which has significantly reduced printing costs.
In FineArt printing this will probably remain an unfulfilled wish.
Yes, that's one reason I'd try and limit expectations in that area
Hi Keith
Im in the market for a 13 “ or 17” inkjet printer for making high quality fine art prints. The ones I’m considering in Canada right now are the Epson P700 or p900. But ive read about some buyers saying they have problems with their reliability. These reviewers mention that their printers stopped working soon after the 1 year warranty ran out. I haven’t seen much on your channel about reliability and durability of Epson printers. Any experience with that?
The other option is to go with the Canon Pro1100 or the Pro300. Apparently Canon printers are more durable and reliable. Is that true? But you also said Canon driver support for Mac users is not great. I need a reliable printer that will work with my MacBook running the latest operating system.
So do you recommend the Epson or Canon? Id appreciate your input. Cheers!
I don't get to do any longer term testing - the printers are loans and I'm not allowed to turn the house into a printer warehouse... ;-)
What 'reviewers' are you referring to - I don't know of anyone, who I'd call a printer reviewer, who has noticed this? Sales reviews for example give no indication of the competence or otherwise of the person making the claims?
I don't see any particular differences between Epson/Canon, other than Canon printers tend to be heavier... The Canon ones [300/1000/1100] are more costly to run if you don't print often and include the costs of ink used for maintenance.
I'd prefer the 900 over the 700, just for the flexibility of being able to do A2, and for the lower cost of ink - don't bother with the roll feed unit... If you need roll get a P5300
See www.redrivercatalog.com/rr/cost-of-inkjet-printing.html
I'm disappointed Epson still used their "Print Automate" software for their T series, I was going to buy one to expand our business but after the troubles we had with the T5200PS not being recognised by Print Automate because it only works with regular and dual roll models (official response from Epson) we opted for a HP Pagewide XL second hand, for about £3k we bought a £25-28k machine. And surprise me not, their new driver even supports the oldest XL variant which came out I believe 7 years ago.
Ah, not printers I'm familiar with...
Hi
I don't know where else to ask about this. A few days ago I randomly decided to dip an inkjet print I'd made in water, and let it dry while being pressed under a book. The Print now has significantly deeper blacks, but has otherwise not degraded in any way (fine grain is still just as visible). The print had dried for a few days before I dipped it. Is this coincidence? Or have I stumbled upon something potentially relevant? I'm really confused.
edit: I was using a cheap epson ecotank printer, as well as high-gloss photo paper
A new one on me - probably very dependent of the actual paper and the ink-set in use
Ink cost is a small part of doing prints. Paper - good paper - is not cheap, and you want to test on the target paper even if the size is smaller. I guess I don't see the obsession with ink cost. Especially when across the pond the ET8500 is more than double the price of the Pro 200 (and paper profiles are less available).
Yes - that's why I try and make the distinction.
It is however an important factor for a sizeable number of people [I'm not one of them BTW]
Canon heavily discounts the pro-200 and before that the pro-100 in some markets
Very interesting video! I could almost see Alec Guinness raising his robed arm saying “this is not the printer you are looking for” 😊
Thanks - I'm immune to many marketing tricks, but not all ;-)
Thank !
Glad it was of interest
In my experience, those that debate should either buy a printer or not at all. Their ability (and I include myself in this) is not good enough to discern the difference between the latest and greatest or the preceding model.
Those with the ability either know to wait, or more likely realise that their target audience [customer] wouldn't be able to identify the difference between the latest or preceding model so will simply buy a "good" printer when their existing one expires, whether there's a new model coming or not.
Yes, same as with many camera updates ;-)
@@KeithCooper I'm still on a D500 and D800 depending on what I'm using it for.
I can't really outperform them, so instead bought some different lenses to go with it :) Nobody has ever criticised the image quality either - never got my head round the "must upgrade to the latest" attitude, how can something go from being the best ever to needing upgrading?!
Hi, a bit of a side note. Lightroom Classic, MacOs15, Canon Pro-1. I tried to print today, and guess what it looks like Adobe / Apple have broken printing again :(. Like earlier in the year the page set up doesn’t show the installed printers and only basic paper sizes. This time around I can’t get a print produced. So a quick question - what would you use to replace the print module from Lightroom? - When it works it works really well for me. I also have a canon G series thanks to your wonderful review and coverage of the ICC profile issue. Prints great but only A4 max. Any thoughts?
Yes - 15 has more issues :-(
More likely Canon has given up on another 'old' printer.
One reason I'll never update any Mac I use for serious work until I need to
Does Canon PPL support the printer? I don't ever use lightroom though - I've used Photoshop for ~25 years :-)
@@KeithCooper Hi thanks for the quick reply. I think the pro 1 may well be at the end of the road. Next “wide” printer will likely be an eco tank version as that is more than enough for my needs. The pro 1 has been excellent for B&W prints, so that is my only hesitation in stepping back to dye inks but your reviews do make it look doable.. The real concern is I do like Editing with LR, so I probably need to dust off my PS printing understanding as for now that maybe the only way I can get prints out for now. Hopefully things will get sorted ASAP on the general print issues from LR…
Hey Keith, very interesting points about the market segmentation with Canon.
It's a very annoying thing honestly. It is expected from any brand or manufacturer it's how they make money they are not the charity.
However CANON is pushing it way too far. For instance same thing with their RF mount system, and trying so hard to keep it closed to third party Lenses manufacturer like Sigma.
About printers I am desperate to see an equivalent of the G650 in A3 size. I will tend to think that they are better than Epson in quite a few metrics, and they would really kick them in the bum with such a printer.
I have bought two g650 for my work. Because I wanted a backup and once I twice the first printer I had failed and I sent it back to the shop.
However now I'm frustrated to not being able to print A3+ and might sell those and get an Epson 8550.
Believe me when I say, This is just to say us so many of us, I'm, we are big canon fan and I've tried really hard to avoid buying Epson for the problems at least they used to have in the past which is: terrible ink consumption and waste when doing maintenance.
With ink tanks printers it matters less however.
I am also really keen to try the TC20M which seems to be quite excellent for photos and can print really big and has ink tanks.
However for my work on location it's way too big.
I just really really need and I think many people do need a TC20M that's aimed at printing A3+ and he's quite smaller and portable.
O please canon! Please make sense and hear your customers and fans needs we only want to buy more of your GREAT products we do not want to buy Epson 😂😂😂, we are only asking to give you more money! ;-))))
For that matter if Canon's products quality was not so great I would have been gone for a long time because their market micro-segmentation and close-minded policies are absolutely shocking sometimes...
Yes - a larger ink tank printer would be useful, as long as it comes with proper drivers
I bet everyone who was waiting for the pro1000 successor in 2020 must be disappointed.
I have heard such opinions... ;-)
Very helpful. But a little bit confusing. I am surprised That printing small Pages is mit recommended on a big printer like the 1100.
Thanks, but it's not 'not recommended' at all...
Just that bigger printers tend to have more limited options [borders and the like] compared with small ones for small sheets.
A comparison of the Epson P7500 and the Canon Pro-2600 would be interesting, looking at print quality and roll handling.
Well, I do have detailed [written] reviews of the P7500 and mechanically similar PRO-2000.
The immediate difference is that the P7500 has a straight through print path.
The pro-2600 is more oriented to 'production' use - roll swapping for example. It's paper handling is more akin to the P6500/8500
Print quality though, is something which means something different to everyone who ever asks ;-) I do hope to get a chance to try a 2600 before ong...
@@KeithCooper Thank you Keith. It would be great to get a hands on review from you on the 2600.
If you are a hobbyist and not wealthy, don't ever buy a photo printer would be my advice. Unless a printer exists which allows me to print something today and print something 6 months from now and the printer stills works fine, I would just not bother. I would rather spend the money having a print company do it for me, let them deal with the hassle of maintaining the thing.
An option to consider if you really print that rarely.
That said, my info here is definitely not aimed at that market, but at people who do want to print...
Yes if you don't want to print don't buy a printer I think that's trying to smash an open door if we take a metaphor.
I can assure you and I can tell when you write a comment like this you have not tried an ink tank printer yet in 2024. You haven't. If you did you'd change your mind. Unless again you don't like photography and then you don't like printing. In which case you want to do something else like playing golf or darts 😂
@@romatou18 I certainly hope you're right. I have a 24" Epson 7880 which I purchased in 2008. Great printer, but it's just really ornery when it's not printing on a regular basis. Ink being expensive I can understand, I just get annoyed to have to run three or more cleaning cycles to get a good nozzle check after it sits for a couple weeks. If that's a thing of the past then hallelujah.
@@TheNathanMChannel I have had an Epson 2400, R3000, SCP600 and now SC-P900. The first two were a problem with blocked nozzles if you left the printer for any time without printing. The P900 is streets ahead of the early ones even the P600 in respect of the need for cleaning cycles and blocked nozzles. I notice the P900 has a specific cleaning function called flushing ( which is automatic) that prevents thickening of the ink in the nozzles and discards that ink periodically. I don't know if it was present in the early printers but if it was it didn't work well!! However I do print regularly at least once a week and more often every three to four days.
I want a printer, not an ink subscription.
Yes - I have zero interest in any subscription style service
Wait to the printers at the 2025 Photo and Video show offers in London
For those near London and not wanting a printer any time soon, maybe...
First time I'll likely not be visiting this show [under whatever name] for over 20 years
Still use my Canon iP4200 printer…😂
Well,,, if it does what you need, why not?