Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: canon ipf5000  (Read 14619 times)
theophilus
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 154


« on: June 02, 2006, 09:49:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Michael-

You mentioned in the printer forum you'd be posting straight away with some first impressions on this printer.  I'm extremely interested in any initial details regarding the setup, intial ink usage, build quality compared with the 4800, etc.  I'm in the market for a printer and have been waiting eagerly for the Canon offering.

As always, thanks for sharing your opinions.
Logged
Brian Gilkes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 431


WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 02, 2006, 08:04:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Perhaps Mark could be persuaded to conduct a cost analysis on ink usage for the new Canon.
I'm sure prints look great . We know the gamut is a little wider than the Epson UC K3 inkset from other reports.The dynamic range is critical as is B&W quality. Tendency to clog , drying times and outgassing are also very important. There have been reports of noticable dots in smooth areas. If that is so, and if there is not a fix, the printer is out. What I am most interested in, and what is seldom reported, is the linearity of the inkset. This was one of the main reasons why people went for the K3 inkset over the older Ultrachrome (K2) set. Performance of the Epson on matte papers with the matte black ink is frankly poor to the point of unacceptability on art papers with images with deep blacks and shadow detail. If Canon can sort this one out they could have a winner.
I am watching these reports with anticipation that we might get answers to these issues.
Many of us will be relying on this sort of information before considering purchasing the bigger machines that will hopefully be released later this year.
How is the rumour mill Bernard?
Cheers,
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7778



WWW
« Reply #2 on: June 02, 2006, 09:02:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
How is the rumour mill Bernard?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=67224\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Nothing new on my side unfortunately...

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
theophilus
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 154


« Reply #3 on: June 03, 2006, 04:18:10 PM »
ReplyReply

I should mention that I'm also really looking forward to Michael's detailed review on how the printer interacts with the 5D via the Direct Print button  

I did find this review from Red River Paper, for others interested in the printer:
http://www.redrivercatalog.com/infocenter/...rafipf5000.html
« Last Edit: June 03, 2006, 04:29:40 PM by theophilus » Logged
ericaro
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 58


« Reply #4 on: June 03, 2006, 04:25:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Brian,
           What other report has shown a wider gamut? I am anxiously waiting too.
                             Louis Bouillon
Logged
Kenneth Sky
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 421


WWW
« Reply #5 on: June 03, 2006, 06:18:52 PM »
ReplyReply

The Red River test seems to show the iPF 5000 produces a sharper, more detailed print than the Epson 4800 but at a cost of smoothness. Of course this is without specific ICC profile or a RIP. Maybe I've switched from "pixel peeping" to "dot dithering"
Logged
Brian Gilkes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 431


WWW
« Reply #6 on: June 04, 2006, 06:19:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Brian,
           What other report has shown a wider gamut? I am anxiously waiting too.
                             Louis Bouillon
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Louis,
Now I can't find the gamut report I read.
The review at
[a href=\"http://www.inkjetart.com/canon/wide/iPF5000.html#review]http://www.inkjetart.com/canon/wide/iPF5000.html#review[/url]
has a couple of unsettling features.
The demonstations of enlarged prints shows a disturbing degree of obvious dots. Perhaps firmware updates, dither or a RIP may overcome this.
The other comment was that gloss differential and bronzing was similar to the 4000 ie worse than the much improved K3 inkset as on the 4800. This will be much harder to fix as it is an ink based problem.
I remain to be convinced that this is the printer of our dreams.
Damn. I would live to be "gobsmacked".
Of course Canon has a reputation for rapid improvement and updates in it's product range and this is it's first venture into the pigment inkjet market.
Still if further reviews confirm these early tests , we could be waiting for a while.
In the interim I think it more likely that Epson will fire back first.
They will have to fix the PK/MK hassle and may well go to 12 inks and larger or twin printheads.
If they can do this and adress the poor blacks especially on matte papers then their dominance in wide format art printers will be assured for some time.
Cheers,
Brian,
www.pharoseditions.com.au
Logged
rapope
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


« Reply #7 on: June 09, 2006, 09:21:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Louis,
Now I can't find the gamut report I read.
The review at
http://www.inkjetart.com/canon/wide/iPF5000.html#review
has a couple of unsettling features.
The demonstations of enlarged prints shows a disturbing degree of obvious dots. Perhaps firmware updates, dither or a RIP may overcome this.
The other comment was that gloss differential and bronzing was similar to the 4000 ie worse than the much improved K3 inkset as on the 4800. This will be much harder to fix as it is an ink based problem.
I remain to be convinced that this is the printer of our dreams.
Damn. I would live to be "gobsmacked".
Of course Canon has a reputation for rapid improvement and updates in it's product range and this is it's first venture into the pigment inkjet market.
Still if further reviews confirm these early tests , we could be waiting for a while.
In the interim I think it more likely that Epson will fire back first.
They will have to fix the PK/MK hassle and may well go to 12 inks and larger or twin printheads.
If they can do this and adress the poor blacks especially on matte papers then their dominance in wide format art printers will be assured for some time.
Cheers,
Brian,
www.pharoseditions.com.au
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=67389\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

FWIW, I grabbed a sample print from an internet-based dealer for both the Canon ipf5000 and the Epson Stylus Pro 7800 and the grain issue that some have commented about was not apparent unless I took a magnifying glass to the prints.  At that point, both showed grain.  To me, it appeared that grain wouldn't be an issue even at closer than normal viewing distances.  However, there were some subtle differences between the ipf5000 and the 7800.  I couldn't decide which one I liked the most!  I was impressed with both!  I would need more prints to evaluate, with bigger subjects.  


HTH,

Rocky
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7778



WWW
« Reply #8 on: June 09, 2006, 10:19:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Of course Canon has a reputation for rapid improvement and updates in it's product range and this is it's first venture into the pigment inkjet market.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=67389\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If I am not mistaken, the 6400 and 8400 released last year were already using pigment inks.

It is therefore the second generation of Canon pigment printers.

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6830


WWW
« Reply #9 on: June 10, 2006, 09:56:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Bernard, I've now had an opportunity to view several of the SAME images printed on an Epson 4800 and Canon IPF5000 on both matte and glossy media. I would like to confirm definitively from my personal observation that both printers produce continuous tone photographs and neither of them show visible grain without a loupe. Since I look at prints to see the photographs and not printer dots, I do not use a loupe and the underlying dot structure is irrelevant, because it isn't visble to the naked eye.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7778



WWW
« Reply #10 on: June 11, 2006, 02:29:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Mark,

Thanks for the confirmation. It is good to have objective reports from reliable people on the topic.

Michael also mentioned that he didn't see any dots in his tests prints.

These are very good news. Did you have the chance to compare the gloss differential and metamerism,... of the prints as well?

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6830


WWW
« Reply #11 on: June 11, 2006, 08:02:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Bernard, comparing for gloss differential and metamerism is a bit tricky and to be honest, I wasn't looking-out for those issues, and very often what you don't look for you don't see. I think in general gloss differential is an over-rated issue because whether you see it depends on the angle at which you look at the print, and generally speaking for non-matte surfaces the angle that minimizes distracting reflectance of the media itself also minimizes the visibility of gloss differential. As for metamerism, one would need to look for it quite carefully under controlled conditions, and I was looking at prints with D50 illumination. That much said, I think in this day and age Canon would be committing commercial "hari-kiri" to produce a printer in that price range which suffers metamerism to any significant extent. For me, neither of these factors would be a deal-breaker on this printer, but that's just me - I have no doubt for many others these issues are more "prioritaire". I was particularly interested in the questions raised elsewhere about non-continuous tone and grain, because the presence of either of them WOULD DEFINITELY BE deal-breakers, and the fact that these are non-issues keeps the IPF5000 on my radar.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6830


WWW
« Reply #12 on: June 11, 2006, 08:34:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Perhaps Mark could be persuaded to conduct a cost analysis on ink usage for the new Canon.
........................................Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=67224\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Brian, yes - if I buy this printer and if its ink consumption data allows, I would certainly be cloning my costing model and starting it over for this printer. That said, let me make three preliminary observations.

(1) From what I hear and read, this printer will be SUBSTANTIALLY more expensive than an Epson 4800. Here in Canada there is a price blitz on the 4800 - obviously someone knows what's around the corner and they're trying to sustain sales. This is good competition. Perhaps it could induce Canon AT LEAST to include the roll paper holder as standard equipment covered in the base price and not a 300 dollar option. Even with that however, Canon will still be costlier than the competition.

Which brings me to point (2): their printer would need to have clear aesthetic, operational and economic advantages over the 4800 to make the investment differential worthwhile. On the aesthetic side, we'll all be best informed with Michael's testing and observations, and we all know this will be done with the seriousness and thoroughness it deserves. On the operational side, the fact that this printer allows one to change media without wasting 150 dollars of ink (Epson) round trip could already justify the investment for those who like to switch media. The number of times one needs to make the round-trip between media depends on the investment cost differential between the SP4800 and the IPF5000. But just for example - to put some initial dimensioning on it: assuming roughly a 1200 price difference between the two machines roller included, (a difference that will slide around as competition evolves)  one only needs 4 round-trips a year over 2 years to make it worth buying the Canon, and that excludes the value of time spent nursing the Epson through the flushing process.

Point (3), and this is really important as my very recent experience on the 4800 is showing, the all-in cost of ink can be very sensitive to the usage pattern of the printer - not in respect of the cost of ink solely used on paper - that remains quite stable in my case at about 0.65 ml per 54 sq. in of Enhanced Matte coverage, but in respect of clogging and cleaning. Based on the Epson experience, I would want to use any new machine under varying operational intervals over a period of three to six months at least to get a reliable fix on clogging and cleaning, which can heavily impact on overall ink consumption per unit of production. Going back to where I started, if I buy this machine and the data allows, I shall do exactly that.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7778



WWW
« Reply #13 on: June 11, 2006, 10:16:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Bernard, comparing for gloss differential and metamerism is a bit tricky and to be honest, I wasn't looking-out for those issues, and very often what you don't look for you don't see.

...

I was particularly interested in the questions raised elsewhere about non-continuous tone and grain, because the presence of either of them WOULD DEFINITELY BE deal-breakers, and the fact that these are non-issues keeps the IPF5000 on my radar.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=67911\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Mark,

I agree with you about the relative priority of things. I was only just wondering whether you had noticed something or not.

How the printer behaves in terms of clogging is indeed key also. I didn't have much time to print recently, and had to go through a power clean up, 3 nozzles clean up and print 2 A2 prints until I got a decent print from my 4000 this afternoon... I don't even want to know much the 4 images I printed today will end up costing...

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6830


WWW
« Reply #14 on: June 11, 2006, 12:12:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Mark,

............I don't even want to know much the 4 images I printed today will end up costing...

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=67914\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

A bundle!

But you can take some consolation in the fact that if you are a slave to your printer and you keep it busy just about every day henceforth, you will be able to amortize that investment in cleaning over a larger volume of prints.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Brian Gilkes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 431


WWW
« Reply #15 on: June 11, 2006, 06:06:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Bernard,
Thanks for the info on Canon's earlied pigmented ink printers, I am lax in my homework.
I did have information that all Canon printers in the Pro area , up fo the current offering/s had linearuty problems resulting in difficult profiling , especially for monochrome.
Mark,
Thanks also. If you obtain this printer many people will be very interested in your analysis.

Just to make things interesting Canon Europe looks like releasing the iPF9000 this month. 12 Lucia inks, 60" wide. I can't find anything on price yet. At 60" this should give Roland , Imaki and Mutoh a stirr as well as Epson. It is not intended for the fine art market that most of us are in, with 50" being usually the widest art paper width. Still the range seems to be filling up and I would expect intermediate printers sooner rather than later now.

Speed will be a very important factor if quality is at least as good as the Epsons, and I am still concerned about linearity.
Cheers,
Brian,
www.pharoseditions.com.au
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7778



WWW
« Reply #16 on: June 11, 2006, 06:16:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Just to make things interesting Canon Europe looks like releasing the iPF9000 this month. 12 Lucia inks, 60" wide. I can't find anything on price yet.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=67939\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I saw a price of 15.000 US$ recently, not sure whether that was list price or not.

I also don't know how much this will end up costing in other geos, including Japan.

This printer was actually demoed as a proto during the CIE in Tokyo in March. The prints looked good, but it is difficult to judge in show conditions.

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
rapope
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


« Reply #17 on: June 18, 2006, 11:31:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
But just for example - to put some initial dimensioning on it: assuming roughly a 1200 price difference between the two machines roller included, (a difference that will slide around as competition evolves)  one only needs 4 round-trips a year over 2 years to make it worth buying the Canon, and that excludes the value of time spent nursing the Epson through the flushing process.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=67912\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Mark,

I'd like to commend you on a very thorough analysis.  You've obviously out a lot of time and thought into this subject.

I am contemplating getting either the Epson Stylus Pro 4800 or the Canon iPF5000.  I was very pleased to see that someone has analyzed this subject, making it much easier for someone such as myself to make an informed choice.

I have samples from the iPF5000 and SP7800, and there are some subtle differences.  I didn't see the grain issue that has been discussed here.  I could choose either (preferably both).

I do have one question.  You stated that you found a $1200 price difference between the two (with the roll feed added in for the Canon).  Is that figure in Canadian dollars?  The reason I ask is that I've seen the Canon going for $ 1,945.95 at one particular NYC dealer.  While they didn't have a price listed for the roll feed, I'll use your $300 figure.  This comes to $ 2245.95.

This dealer is selling the Epson for $ 1,819.95.  The difference comes out to $426, which is starting to look more reasonable than $1200.   But if I were to get the Epson, I'd have to get the Pro package, both because it comes with a RIP and because it comes with an Ethernet interface.


Regards,

Rocky
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6830


WWW
« Reply #18 on: June 18, 2006, 12:52:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Rocky, thanks, but that was far from a thorough analysis. It was just some rough dimensioning based on preliminary information. The thorough analysis may come later. Re the price differential, yes I am working in CAD. The price I hear the Canon will cost here in Canada when released is about 2400~2450 plus another 300 for the roll holder, bringing it to about 2750. Regarding the Epson 4800 - one dealer here in Toronto now has it on sale for about 2000 after a mail-in rebate. As the Epson includes the roll holder, this is a fair price comparison. So that brings the difference to about CAD 750, which after taxes amounts to a difference of about 850. Some weeks ago there was a short-term extra-special on the Epson which brought the difference several hundred higher, but that is gone now.

I don't think we know enough about the operating cost of the Canon yet to make a fully informed choice based on comparative costs alone (which for most purchasers in this market niche would not likely be the most important criterion in any case) - but it is nonetheless obvious that provided other factors don't knock Canon's costs out of line, the smaller the price difference between the two machines the more advantageous the Canon will be for any one wanting to switch frequently between matte and glossy media. My sense is that print quality, flexibility and ease of use will be the decisive variables for most purchasers.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
rapope
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


« Reply #19 on: June 18, 2006, 08:22:21 PM »
ReplyReply

It's pretty strange how the prices can vary from the US to Canada!  Even taking into account the dollar fluctuations, it's crazy.

I'm hoping to take a ride into New York (I live on Long Island) soon, and I'm hoping to see if the store has a Canon unit to check out.  I'd like to actually check this thing out in person before deciding on one or the other (based on the sample prints I acquired).  The Epson is a known entity.

One thing that goes away from the Canon is the fact that they ship the unit with "starter" cartridges.  It comes out to $900 (US) to buy all 12 ink cartridges at once.  That would possibly be the only time one would have to buy all 12 inks at once, that is unless there was a pile of prints to be made.  If I were just printing out my personal work I wouldn't blow all 130ml of ink at once!


Regards,

Rocky
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad