Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: First look at iPF5100 & 6100  (Read 10690 times)
phila
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 248



WWW
« on: May 11, 2007, 04:34:29 AM »
ReplyReply

www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-8739-8965
Logged

David Anderson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 363



WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 11, 2007, 05:53:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from Robgailbraith.com story on the new Canon IPF printers -

"The new black inks will not work in the iPF5000, they will neither slide in nor be recognized in the older model. The iPF5100 uses the same 130ml cartridge design as before, and in fact the other eight ink cartridges are unchanged from the iPF5000, but the shape of the four new black cartridges is slightly different to ensure they aren't placed into an incompatible printer accidentally."

I'll have to look into this, I really hope it's not Canon doing a Hasselblad and putting the finger up to the early adopters of their new technology..  
Logged

chris anderson
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 111


« Reply #2 on: May 11, 2007, 07:44:20 AM »
ReplyReply

that is exactly what it is...............................
Logged
abiggs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 538



WWW
« Reply #3 on: May 11, 2007, 11:33:33 AM »
ReplyReply

what intrigues me was the statement about the 6100 being the same as the 5100, only wider. I suspect that one of the major differences, other than the size, will be the lack of a front loading cassette on the 6100.

I would absolutely love to have a huge cut sheet feeder/cassete on the front of a wide format printer, that way I could consolidate all of my printing needs into 1 printer.
Logged

Andy Biggs
http://www.andybiggs.com
Africa Photo Safaris | Workshops | Fine Art Prints
JPrimgaard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 54


« Reply #4 on: May 11, 2007, 09:12:32 PM »
ReplyReply

It's been interesting to see some comments on this and other forums regarding the coming of the ipf5100.  

There seems to be an attitude of Canon stiffing the 5000 owners with this release.

I'm curious as to why this mindset prevails.  When Epson introduced new printers were they sticking it to the prior model owners too?   Did the older printers get the benefit of the newer inks?  I don't know, didn't follow it that close, but I would guess not.

The ipf5000 make mighty ffine prints, that's why people bought it.  So now there is something with a few more bells and whistles.  I'll bet that even after the 5100 ships (many months away) that the 5000 will still make mighty fine prints.

When the 30D was announced, was that sticking it to the 20D owners?  I guess some will say that the 5100 came faster.  So what.  It still makes mighty fine prints.

As for the built in calibration, doesn't seem like that great of a deal to me.  Sure, if the price is the same, what the heck.  But it will be a while until we actually see them.  How about all the printing you will do with your 5000 until then?  Would you give it back this moment for a full refund to sit without a printer and wait for the 5100 to ship at the price you paid?  Not I.

Stop looking at every little gizmo as being the answer to your "needs" and get back to what you bought your printer for, making great prints.

Now that that's off my chest, back to my printer
Logged
David Anderson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 363



WWW
« Reply #5 on: May 11, 2007, 09:37:49 PM »
ReplyReply

While I expect things get updated and new models released the 5100 has only been available here in Oz for six months, so IMO it's a little early for a replacement..  

The real issue to me is that the new inks don't work with the 5000.

I'll call Canon on monday and ask what the story is...
Logged

Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6767


WWW
« Reply #6 on: May 11, 2007, 10:06:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It's been interesting to see some comments on this and other forums regarding the coming of the ipf5100. 

There seems to be an attitude of Canon stiffing the 5000 owners with this release.

I'm curious as to why this mindset prevails.  When Epson introduced new printers were they sticking it to the prior model owners too?   Did the older printers get the benefit of the newer inks?  I don't know, didn't follow it that close, but I would guess not.

The ipf5000 make mighty ffine prints, that's why people bought it.  So now there is something with a few more bells and whistles.  I'll bet that even after the 5100 ships (many months away) that the 5000 will still make mighty fine prints.

When the 30D was announced, was that sticking it to the 20D owners?  I guess some will say that the 5100 came faster.  So what.  It still makes mighty fine prints.

As for the built in calibration, doesn't seem like that great of a deal to me.  Sure, if the price is the same, what the heck.  But it will be a while until we actually see them.  How about all the printing you will do with your 5000 until then?  Would you give it back this moment for a full refund to sit without a printer and wait for the 5100 to ship at the price you paid?  Not I.

Stop looking at every little gizmo as being the answer to your "needs" and get back to what you bought your printer for, making great prints.

Now that that's off my chest, back to my printer
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=117038\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Have you been to John Hollenberg's Wiki to read all about Canon and the IPF5000? What you'll see there is how Canon stiffed consumers with the IPF5000. The main question about the IPF5100 isn't whether it uses different cartridges that can't be used in the IPF5000, but whether Canon is packaging "lessons of experience" from the IPF5000 debacle and a new corporate philosophy with the new printer. That remains very much to be seen, and as consumers with an interest in viable competitive options, it's important. Galbraith's review doesn't get into any of this.
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
mkress65
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 25


« Reply #7 on: May 11, 2007, 10:51:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It's been interesting to see some comments on this and other forums regarding the coming of the ipf5100. 

There seems to be an attitude of Canon stiffing the 5000 owners with this release. <snip>

Stop looking at every little gizmo as being the answer to your "needs" and get back to what you bought your printer for, making great prints.

Now that that's off my chest, back to my printer
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=117038\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Not sure that I've really seen much griping (yet); my only disappointment is that I had hoped that, with the user replaceable print heads, any improvement in ink/ printhead technology would be available as a print head upgrade in the future (when my print heads wore out or I felt the improvements warranted buying new ones).  Since they have made the ink cartridges not work in the 5000, that won't work.  I am going to be pretty honked off if they offer a warranty on the 5100 print heads and not the 5000    

Does it still make great prints?  You bet.  Had I known the 5100 was coming, would I have waited to buy?  Maybe...

Matt
Logged
Garycay
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 109


« Reply #8 on: May 12, 2007, 09:24:08 AM »
ReplyReply

And we won't / don't know what changes this results in for the "permanance" of the inks on paper either. Wilhelm took a long time to release information for the 5000, and the release was a little short of what had been suggested it would be, though perfectly acceptable in final analyses.

As an owner of a 5000 and a very early adopter who paid full price, I personally thinks this sucks in the absence of some kind of "offering" from Canon for upgrade or for being on board. But these days that kind of thinking is pretty uncommon except from us users.

I do question the "universal" calibration being done as possibly limiting gamuet. I don't know enough to be specific other than to say it seems possible being non-paper specific (for it to limiting).

Gary

Quote
www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-8739-8965
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=116928\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
thompsonkirk
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 205


WWW
« Reply #9 on: May 12, 2007, 08:31:52 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm certainly not against a new model, but I do note that Canon has in some important respects "stiffed" iPF5000 owners with a halt in support:  

They never posted a usable version of current firmware on their US website - only a broken link/loop.  They've had about a month to fix that.  

They have not produced a Universal Binary version of the PS plug-in that's needed by Intel Mac owners.

They agreed to respond to issues raised on the Wiki in early May, but have not yet done so.  

This & other stuff on the Wiki suggests that dealing with Canon about customer support for printers is a high-risk venture.  I'd like to see a boycott of the new models until they come appropriate manuals, software, firmware, & head & cartidge warranties for the 5000.


Kirk
Logged
mkress65
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 25


« Reply #10 on: May 12, 2007, 11:05:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'm certainly not against a new model, but I do note that Canon has in some important respects "stiffed" iPF5000 owners with a halt in support: 

They never posted a usable version of current firmware on their US website - only a broken link/loop.  They've had about a month to fix that. 
<snip>
Kirk
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=117203\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

As info, they just (yesterday or today) posted firmware 1.25 on the Canon USA site.

No argument w/ the rest, but thought I'd at least let you know that the firmware is finally available.

Matt
Logged
neil snape
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1431


WWW
« Reply #11 on: May 13, 2007, 03:59:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
And we won't / don't know what changes this results in for the "permanance" of the inks on paper either. Wilhelm took a long time to release information for the 5000, and the release was a little short of what had been suggested it would be, though perfectly acceptable in final analyses.

As an owner of a 5000 and a very early adopter who paid full price, I personally thinks this sucks in the absence of some kind of "offering" from Canon for upgrade or for being on board. But these days that kind of thinking is pretty uncommon except from us users.

I do question the "universal" calibration being done as possibly limiting gamuet. I don't know enough to be specific other than to say it seems possible being non-paper specific (for it to limiting).

Gary
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=117106\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

WIR does preliminary testing where the figures are not and will not be released to the public. So do all the makers in their own facilities. Truth is the ink formulation until truly buckled dow is something that Henry tries to preserve the honesty of the very important tests. In the case of the Z printers the 2100 was easier to do as the inks are the exact same as the 9180 or Snap fish. Yet the Z 3100 was still having minor tweaks here and there. The reports of the shipping models then are not able to be done until ship time, and the early estimations are sometimes slightly different than expected.
I am hoping that HP will make good on a concept> if upgrades can be had that adapt to their platform printer, the users can for an upgrade price of course do so if they feel it is worthwhile and or necessary. I don't see Epson or Canon doing this. We'll see with HP .

IF the calibration is only on one paper then it is similar to the 9180 where it is more a measure of the writing system output and lesser the media characteristics, yet does take into account op environment. So for print head changes it is a requirement. For calibration to maintain global consistency it is a good thing. For an absolute, it's not near as good as a per media calibration, nor is it a way of validating profiles. Truth is thermal heads need a lot more control than Piezo. I will say that the variation isn't a make or break deal, just that for that reassurance that your prints will always be consistent between print runs to the highest degree, says you will have almost no rejects due to consistency or repeatability.
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6767


WWW
« Reply #12 on: May 13, 2007, 06:56:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'm certainly not against a new model, but I do note that Canon has in some important respects "stiffed" iPF5000 owners with a halt in support: 

They never posted a usable version of current firmware on their US website - only a broken link/loop.  They've had about a month to fix that. 

They have not produced a Universal Binary version of the PS plug-in that's needed by Intel Mac owners.

They agreed to respond to issues raised on the Wiki in early May, but have not yet done so. 

This & other stuff on the Wiki suggests that dealing with Canon about customer support for printers is a high-risk venture.  I'd like to see a boycott of the new models until they come appropriate manuals, software, firmware, & head & cartidge warranties for the 5000.
Kirk
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=117203\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm in the market for a replacement to my 4800 that allows "no cost" media switching between matte and glossy. The HP Z series is overkill for my needs, I am hesitant about the Epson 3800 for several reasons but still have it in consideration because Epson stands behind their product, but I wouldn't touch Canon IPF printers with a barge-pole until: (1) they produce Epson and HP quality documentation with the printer; (2) they have resolved all user interface issues between the printer and the computer, (3) they arrange with their dealers a return policy that allows customers to return the machines within thirty days of purchase if they are not completely satisfied, (4) they offer solid long-duration warranties on the print-heads and automatic no-questions-asked exchange of defective cartridges, (5) they offer an Epson-quality technical support service giving COMPETENT next-business day service over the internet and by phone and rapid service-center based repairs.
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: 7525



WWW
« Reply #13 on: May 13, 2007, 07:19:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'm curious as to why this mindset prevails.  When Epson introduced new printers were they sticking it to the prior model owners too?   Did the older printers get the benefit of the newer inks?  I don't know, didn't follow it that close, but I would guess not.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=117038\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, Epson very much did the same to the 4000 users when the 4800 was introduced.

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

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

Posts: 6767


WWW
« Reply #14 on: May 13, 2007, 07:41:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Yes, Epson very much did the same to the 4000 users when the 4800 was introduced.

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=117258\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This is correct, but both the 4000 and the 4800 have user-friendly firmware, good instruction manuals and a good product support system to back them up. The main difference between the 4000 and the 4800 was the move to the Ultrachrome K3 inkset. It's not as if Epson had a legacy of big-ticket issues on their hands that they failed to deal with properly before they issued the 4800 (except for head-clogging which seems endemic to that technology). People were simply pissed that a new model followed the previous model so rapidly. The problems with Canon's corporate philosophy are so fundamental that any comparison with the Epson situation is not quite relevant.

It is of course not reasonable to expect that every piece of hardware produced now will have components that are backward compatible with previous models. Design concepts and technologies evolve - they must - so no-one should expect this progress to be retarded by the need to cater for everything that was manufactured before. I don't expect the gizmos made for a Toyota Sienna to fit my Toyota Previa - why should it be otherwise for a printer?
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
thompsonkirk
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 205


WWW
« Reply #15 on: May 13, 2007, 12:04:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Bernard,

To an Epson 4000 owner who replaced it with an iPF5000, the situation sure doesn't feel the same.  

My Epson warranty problem was solved in 2 days by air-freighting me a second printer.  The Wiki stories for Canon support don't exactly echo that.

When the 4800 came out, Epson very quickly issued revised firmware for the 4000, incorporating improvements developed for the 4800 (those that didn't depend on the different inksets).  

My current don't-hold-your-breath hope for Canon is that they'll do the same: if they write a new PS plug-in for the 5100, please dear gods of the underworld, make it 5000-compatible.  With an Intel Mac, the printer is a pain-in-the-* until they release one.  Even the smaller software companies have provided UB updates, at least in pretty good beta versions, by now.

Kirk
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7525



WWW
« Reply #16 on: May 13, 2007, 07:22:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Bernard,

To an Epson 4000 owner who replaced it with an iPF5000, the situation sure doesn't feel the same. 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=117308\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Kirk and Mark,

Fair enough, the situations with Epson and Canon are probably different.

As far as I am concerned, and based on the situation with the HP Z3100, I will most probably not buy in either Canon or HP for another few months until the situations stabilize. Then Epson will release their own next generation... and I'll have to wait for a few more months.

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

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

Posts: 6767


WWW
« Reply #17 on: May 13, 2007, 07:30:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Kirk and Mark,

Fair enough, the situations with Epson and Canon are probably different.

As far as I am concerned, and based on the situation with the HP Z3100, I will most probably not buy in either Canon or HP for another few months until the situations stabilize. Then Epson will release their own next generation... and I'll have to wait for a few more months.

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=117373\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Bernard, this is very much where I am at. I just have an intuition that within the next three quarters Epson will release a successor to the X800 series that will have more of the feature set which the competition is facing them with, in the build quality of the 4800. That is a "potential option" I think worth waiting a while for, while perhaps the other guys improve their act. Then we'll have some REAL choices to make.
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
rdonson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1420


WWW
« Reply #18 on: May 14, 2007, 02:38:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Kirk and Mark,

Fair enough, the situations with Epson and Canon are probably different.

As far as I am concerned, and based on the situation with the HP Z3100, I will most probably not buy in either Canon or HP for another few months until the situations stabilize. Then Epson will release their own next generation... and I'll have to wait for a few more months.

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=117373\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Bernard, what do you think the situation is with the HP Z3100 that needs to stabilize?
Logged

[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'][span style='font-family:Arial'][span style='font-family:Geneva'][span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']Regards,
Ron[/span][/span][/span][/span]
Jim_H_WY
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 22


« Reply #19 on: May 16, 2007, 11:56:25 AM »
ReplyReply

As an iPF5000 owner, I can't speak for others, but I can speak for myself.

My worry is that Canon will adopt the same policy that they have with their cameras.  Namely, that once a model is replaced NO further firmware updates are ever issued for the orphaned models unless a gross bug is found.  To my knowledge, it's never happened.

I also worry that this abandonment will extend to the "PC Side" software as well.

If the documentation, firmware, and software for the 5000 was mostly bug-free at this point, this would not be much of an issue.  But there are still some serious bugs in the firmware and software of the 5000.

When the 5000 was the flagship 17" model from Canon, there was some (slight, I'll admit) hope that the firmware and software for the unit would continue to be updated and that some of the bugs would be fixed.  Now that the iPF5000 is effectively out of production, hope for serious consideration of existing issues is dimmed considerably.

I expect new models to replace old models.  And I don't expect that the new features of the new models will be retrofitted to or backwards compatible with the old models.  But it is a bit discouraging to feel that existing and ongoing problems will now be ignored even more than they were when the model was in production and presumably they cared about what prospective buyers might think.

What real incentive does Canon now have to address these unresolved problems with the iPF5000?

Maybe it's just me, but I believe I hear the distant sound of a door slamming shut...

Jim H.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad