Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Image quality of 2200 w/IP vs. iPF5000  (Read 3510 times)
K.C.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 650


« on: October 11, 2006, 03:19:25 AM »
ReplyReply

My 2200 is working fine with ImagePrint but I'm curious if anyone has made a side-by-side comparison with prints from a Canon iPF5000.

Does the Canon offer anything my current setup doesn't ?

Any info would be appreciated.

 - Kirk
Logged
Gary Damaskos
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 111


« Reply #1 on: October 11, 2006, 06:18:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Probably cheaper cost per print, more speed, more versatility, and greater size, possibly wider gamut, better archivability rating...
Gary

Quote
My 2200 is working fine with ImagePrint but I'm curious if anyone has made a side-by-side comparison with prints from a Canon iPF5000.

Does the Canon offer anything my current setup doesn't ?

Any info would be appreciated.

 - Kirk
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79915\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
tonywh
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« Reply #2 on: October 13, 2006, 06:29:14 PM »
ReplyReply

I have both and the imageprint rip for the 2200 using epson inks in a cis system, the ipf5000 is better in every aspect. In fact it so much better I had completly forgotten about the 2200 untill reading your post.

tony
Logged
K.C.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 650


« Reply #3 on: October 13, 2006, 08:09:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks Tony, that's the kind of information I was looking for.

The 2200 with IP is pretty damned good so the Canon must be amazing.

 - Kirk
Logged
serf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 42


« Reply #4 on: October 13, 2006, 09:36:01 PM »
ReplyReply

The Canon is great & I would do it again, coming from a 2200.  Apart from excellent print quality with custom profiles, the ability to have an automated roll feeder & cut sheet cassette simultaneously available, with no need to change ink for matte/photo ar appreciated.

But there are some issues - poor documentation, learning curve on proper setting (required both on printer & on computer driver), inability to work with normal printer driver on an Intel Mac Pro & other issues.  Canon's web site is of little use.  Few forums with any concentration of users, so though people are helpful there are not that many of them, yet.  Gary has some good insights here.
Logged
David White
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272



WWW
« Reply #5 on: October 14, 2006, 12:15:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
inability to work with normal printer driver on an Intel Mac Pro & other issues.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=80329\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I run Windows XP and have developed all my profiles for the 16-bit driver;  however, the times I have used the 8-bit system driver I've encountered no problems.  I haven't heard of a problem with Mac's.  Could you elaborate?

I would strongly recommend this printer.  I waited out Epson on getting a printer this size because of their drawbacks and am glad I did.  The prints are beautiful and I've had no clogs even with 15% humidity.
Logged

David White
serf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 42


« Reply #6 on: October 14, 2006, 02:15:11 PM »
ReplyReply

On an Intel Mac Pro, the driver does not work (basically, at all - you can't effectively change any of the parameters).  According to CS, Canon is likely to update the driver to unversal binary for OSX.  (I have not tried it on a PC, yet.  I suspect it would work fine.)  I may try to install the printer driver into an XP VM on top of Parallels & see how that works.  Even if it works, it's still an awkward work around until the unversal binary driver update is issued for anyone with an Intel Mac Pro or MBP, as I understand it.  In the meantime, the Photoshop 16 bit Plug-in appears to work on the Intel Mac Pro.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2006, 02:16:18 PM by serf » Logged
thompsonkirk
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 205


WWW
« Reply #7 on: October 14, 2006, 07:16:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Serf, please elaborate:

I believe Michael mentioned in his review that printing via the 16-bit plug-in produces the finest prints.  So in other words, you're saying that the only way it works at all is the way it works best?
Logged
serf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 42


« Reply #8 on: October 14, 2006, 11:15:25 PM »
ReplyReply

I do not have one but I am told the regular driver works on a G4. My Intel Mac Pro is my first Mac. The driver does not work with it
Logged
K.C.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 650


« Reply #9 on: October 15, 2006, 12:58:30 AM »
ReplyReply

My Mac Pro is due this week but I have a G5 that can become a print station if that works better for now.

I'm happy to buy a Canon just to avoid the Epson loop of not-quite-right printers. While there are some issues with the Canon it seems they've at least addressed the big issues.
Logged
serf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 42


« Reply #10 on: October 15, 2006, 08:21:19 AM »
ReplyReply

According to another user, your G5 should work (in fact, it appears any PPC would work).

http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?m...3343225#3343225

Great printer otherwise.  Good luck.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad