Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: New guy needs new printer  (Read 9158 times)
Bas Stekelenburg
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


WWW
« on: September 27, 2008, 10:05:10 AM »
ReplyReply

After years of reading and thinking, rereading, rethinking and doubts, There Will Be A New Printer.
It will be either a Canon iPF6100, an Epson 7880 or a HP Z3200. If you (or you, or you,) can convince me which one is the Right Choice.
Much, but not all will be printed black and white; Im an old B/W darkroom addict.
What are my considerations? I have only a Nikon D700, which means 12 MP RAW files. I have no experience with up-res (programs), I use Lightroom 2.1 and PS CS3 only on a Vista platform with two calibrated 22 displays.
To date I print not salable copies on a 13 Canon i9900. So I thought, maybe the 17 Canon iPF 5100 or the Epson 4880 is big enough
However, I do have thousands of Nikon F5 and Hasselblad 6x6 negatives; 99 % B/W of which the 10% best to be scanned (ever) to print them again on my new machine. And, when the next Nikon camera appears with 20+ MP, I will be able to print 24 wide with acceptable quality, right?
Questions, questions, questions.
For my B/W work the HP Z3200 with 4 blacks (in matt) seems to be the best, but is also the most expensive of the three. BTW, do I need the PS version, even more expensive?
I do not print daily, and the printer must be placed in my not too big office, so the sound of the always-on HP might be annoying, or not? Do you know?
I hate to swap the Epson PB / MB cartridges for the loss of ink. Not nice, right?
Questions, questions, questions.
I used to print on Ilford and Agfa multigrade barite, with its egg-shine, toned in selenium, mmmm. What paper to use on the new printer to get that back? Should I try the 1000 and 1 brand and third party papers? Start with the Hanemulle and other well-respected newest papers? Which one? And how do I tell my Canon / Epson the way to handle this paper? Only the HP has a profiling tool. Other question, how does Lightroom knows how to use my printer profiles?
Questions, questions, questions.
I would really appreciate any detailed advice, based more or less on my situation. I read these columns since Im a member, in fact that is why I know that any of these printers is a good choice. I live and work in Amsterdam, so if any of you lives not too far Ill be glad to come and take a look of How You Did It And Why, but please react wherever you live.

Bas.

P.S. And then the news came in of a Canon iPF6200. Waiting again?
Logged
Geoff Wittig
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1017


« Reply #1 on: September 27, 2008, 10:33:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Just my 2 cents-
I've been using an HP Z3100 for the past 18 months after years with large format Epsons. If black & white is your thing, I don't think you can beat the HP Z printers. Four blacks all the time, and a D-max on matte papers which is perceptibly darker than the best Epson can do. The built-in spectro really does work transparently and easily, and I've been more than pleased with the quality of resulting profiles. This makes it a snap to try out new papers, and I have a handful of favorites I use depending on subject matter.

I don't think you need the PS model unless you're printing a lot of vector graphics.  The HP printer takes care of its own head cleaning and maintenance if you leave it on; all is well even if you don't print for weeks. You can hear the fan and hard disk if you're in a very quiet room, but I have mine right next to my computer desk & it's not objectionable. At infrequent intervals the printer does wake up to spray a few droplets and confirm that the heads are clear.

Epson's big advantage is in paper handling, where its vacuum transport does a better job with very thick or delicate papers, and in third-party support. You're more likely to find canned profiles for the Epson printers that are decent.

Your Nikon D700 has plenty of resolution to produce a really good 18x24" print with even minimally competent post-processing, so you'll find a 24" wide printer worth it. And you can always go bigger by stitching.

I don't have any experience with Canon's wide format printers; others on this forum can speak to them. They definitely have their own virtues.
Logged
jeffreybehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 277


WWW
« Reply #2 on: September 27, 2008, 11:32:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Bas, I started my fotografy 'career' in 2000, soon had pairs of D30s, then D60s, then a 1Ds.  I bought an Epson 7000 (with dye inks) and then an Epson 7600UC.  I've made hundreds of about-22X34" prints and 50+"-wide panos with both.  I sold the 7600 when I got out of landscape fotografy a couple years ago, but I'm back and am looking for a printer myself.  Mine will be a 17"er.

You have plenty of resolution for large prints on any of these machines.  I'd use Photoshop to uprez the images to the desired size and the native resolution of each printer...240 or 360PPI for the Epson, 200 or 300PPI (I believe) for the Canon.  Sharpen carefully and your prints will look spectacular.


(BTW the bulbs here are 5100K flourescent reflectored floods.)

If B&W prints are important, pay attention to those who know something about printing them; the ink switching inherent with the Epsons probably is at least an inconvenience and maybe even an expensive deal-killer.
Logged

kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2228



WWW
« Reply #3 on: September 27, 2008, 11:41:14 AM »
ReplyReply

You won't beat the HP for B&W - absolutely gorgeous results...
Logged

rdonson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1422


WWW
« Reply #4 on: September 27, 2008, 12:33:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Bas,

A couple of things to consider if cost is a consideration.

- where are you going to get your profiles?  
- are you going to use stock profiles?
- are you going to purchase profiles from someone?

As you've pointed out the HP Z has a built in spectro.  I factored in the desire/need for a spectro into my printer decision and the HP Z didn't look most expensive any more.

For me, the Z doesn't make enough noise to be noticeable.  I only hear it when it starts up for its periodic self checks.

The Print module in Lightroom allows you to choose print profiles.  It doesn't allow you to perform softproofing.  Right now that's best accomplished in Photoshop.  You can go from Lightroom to Photoshop for softproofing/adjustment and back to Lightroom for printing.

In reality any of the printers you mention will provide dazzling prints that will delight you and your customers.
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]
neil snape
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1433


WWW
« Reply #5 on: September 27, 2008, 02:21:12 PM »
ReplyReply

I would include the Epson 7900 with the spectro option. It doesn't purge a lot of ink on switches, has a doubled head nozzle count, a better system for the spectro, and all the things the past 7880 had like aspirated media path.

BTW the Z printers don't use 4 blacks on many matte papers, nor would you want too. The photo black on matte is actually unnecessary, hence redundant.
Logged
Roscolo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 621


« Reply #6 on: September 27, 2008, 02:40:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If black & white is your thing, I don't think you can beat the HP Z printers.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=224934\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


That's what my 17 months of experience with the z3100 says as well. Sounds like you can get a real deal on a z3100, or spend a lot more $$$ and get the z3200. Can't go wrong either way.
Logged
Jim Pascoe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 826


WWW
« Reply #7 on: September 29, 2008, 03:45:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Bas

I have been using an ipf6100 since February and it is a great printer.  My previous printer was an Epson 4000, and like many users was frustrated by the amount of ink wasted with head cleaning.

The Canon has been working fairly hard, with at least seven 30meter rolls used, plus canvas, and thousands of cut sheets.  The price of ink seems very reasonable, particularly if you are selling the prints!

I too love black and white, and the prints really are good.  There is even a dedicated print plug-in
supplied by Canon which is very easy to use.

Of course, unlike some of the posters here, I do not have a range of different printers to directly compare.  But what I can say is that the ipf6100 is everything I need in a printer at this time.

Jim
Logged
Bas Stekelenburg
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


WWW
« Reply #8 on: September 29, 2008, 09:41:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Just my 2 cents-
I've been using an HP Z3100 for the past 18 months after years with large format Epsons. If black & white is your thing, I don't think you can beat the HP Z printers. Four blacks all the time, and a D-max on matte papers which is perceptibly darker than the best Epson can do. The built-in spectro really does work transparently and easily, and I've been more than pleased with the quality of resulting profiles. This makes it a snap to try out new papers, and I have a handful of favorites I use depending on subject matter.

Dear Geoff,
A good and to the point advise. Thank you for sharing your experiences.
Im leaning over to HP. In fact, I choose HP. But. Here in Holland I found a favorable deal for the Z3100. Only one small detail. Sold out, everywhere. Now Im back to zero, because the Z3200, nobody even knows when it will be in stock, goes for much more bananas.
Ill keep you (all) informed how the story continues.

Bas
Logged
Bas Stekelenburg
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


WWW
« Reply #9 on: September 29, 2008, 09:43:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You won't beat the HP for B&W - absolutely gorgeous results...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=224950\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Dear Bryan G,
your advise was not what we call elaborate, but sufficient. I followed, see my reply to Geoff.

Bas
Logged
Bas Stekelenburg
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


WWW
« Reply #10 on: September 29, 2008, 09:46:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Bas,

As you've pointed out the HP Z has a built in spectro.  I factored in the desire/need for a spectro into my printer decision and the HP Z didn't look most expensive any more.

For me, the Z doesn't make enough noise to be noticeable.  I only hear it when it starts up for its periodic self checks.


Dear Ron,
Youre absolutely right that I must add the cost of a profiler, at least a Color Munki, for a decent comparison. I was glad to hear that the noise of the Z3100 is minor, it helped me with choosing for HP. But see what I wrote Geoff.

Bas
Logged
Bas Stekelenburg
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


WWW
« Reply #11 on: September 29, 2008, 09:48:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I would include the Epson 7900 with the spectro option. It doesn't purge a lot of ink on switches, has a doubled head nozzle count, a better system for the spectro, and all the things the past 7880 had like aspirated media path.

BTW the Z printers don't use 4 blacks on many matte papers, nor would you want too. The photo black on matte is actually unnecessary, hence redundant.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=224989\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Dear Neil,
after looking at your GREAT website, what a beautiful pictures, attractive women, beautiful colors and strong B & Ws, but most of all after reading your enthusiastic report on the HP Z3100 (where you wrote yourself about the four blacks used at certain matte papers) I was a little surprised with your reaction to include the Epson 7900. I learned that the spectro is but an option here and that Epson continues the 7880, more for photographers, aside the 7900, more for the (proofing and spot color using) graphic industry. Am I wrong?
Your closer to me then many of the others (Amsterdam Paris can be done by TGV Real Soon Now) and Ill love to take a look one day, possible?

Bas
Logged
Bas Stekelenburg
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


WWW
« Reply #12 on: September 29, 2008, 09:52:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
That's what my 17 months of experience with the z3100 says as well. Sounds like you can get a real deal on a z3100, or spend a lot more $$$ and get the z3200. Can't go wrong either way.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=225000\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Roscolo, Im convinced, but please read my answer to Geoff.

Bas
Logged
Bas Stekelenburg
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


WWW
« Reply #13 on: September 29, 2008, 09:55:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hi Bas

(...)
The Canon has been working fairly hard, with at least seven 30meter rolls used, plus canvas, and thousands of cut sheets.  The price of ink seems very reasonable, particularly if you are selling the prints!

I too love black and white, and the prints really are good.  There is even a dedicated print plug-in
supplied by Canon which is very easy to use.
(...)

Jim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=225420\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thank you Jim, I must honestly say that I started my trip with a Canon in mind, was pulled over to the HP side, especially because of the spectro and the 4 blacks on matte, and now, as you can read in my respond to Geoff, I am back to where I started because of the big price difference between the brand new Z3200 and the sold out Z3100, about 1000 Euro difference.
Bas
Logged
Rob Reiter
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 230



WWW
« Reply #14 on: September 29, 2008, 12:05:07 PM »
ReplyReply

After 6 years of using Epson 44" printers, I had a reason (speed) and opportunity (aggressive price breaks by Canon) to buy an ipf 8100.

Over the last year and a half I wanted very much to talk myself into getting the Z3100 and didn't for two reasons-reduced red saturation in shadows on matte papers and reports of paper handling difficulties, especially with glossy papers.

After using the Canon for 6 weeks, I feel there is very little difference in raw image quality with my Epson 9800. Each printer has slight differences in color, but they are so close I am almost not able to see differences in side by side comparisons. Where the Canon does always win, however, is in it's blues. The Epson, printing through the ImagePrint RIP, has slightly more shadow detail, but I can usually tweak a little more out of the image when printing on the 8100 so as not to have much difference.

The Canon is also at least twice as fast and with both black inks I'm enjoying printing on different papers. Paper feeding, both roll and sheet, is very straight forward. The Photoshop plug-in makes true 16 bit printing easy.

So, if cost is an issue and the 6100 is being discounted in Europe as heavily as it is in the states, don't worry about the image quality or workflow issues with Canon printers.



Quote from: HasselBas,Sep 27 2008, 03:05 PM
After years of reading and thinking, rereading, rethinking and doubts, There Will Be A New Printer.
It will be either a Canon iPF6100, an Epson 7880 or a HP Z3200. If you (or you, or you,) can convince me which one is the Right Choice.
Logged

http://www.lightroom.com Fine art printing for photographers and other artists
hsmeets
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 182


« Reply #15 on: September 29, 2008, 03:21:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Bas,

we already exchanged a few emails outside the forum, I think Rob Reiter touched the same points as I did: all three printers deliver are on par with each other, however each with their own strength and weaknesses.

As far as I know, from a money point of view the canon offers the most bang for the buck in the Netherlands, even if you buy a seperate print profiling kit.

Just 1 point to add to the 16 bit printing: The Canon PS plugin is a delight to use and it will take 16 bits PS files as input, but the printer itself is "only" 12 bits. However these 12 bits still give you far more numbers of greys then 8 bits (256 values) opposed to when you print through the windows printer driver which is always 8 bits by design of Mr. Gates. I'm not aware if OS-X does 16 bits.

Huib
« Last Edit: September 29, 2008, 03:23:15 PM by hsmeets » Logged

Bas Stekelenburg
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


WWW
« Reply #16 on: September 29, 2008, 04:24:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hi Bas,

(...)
As far as I know, from a money point of view the canon offers the most bang for the buck in the Netherlands, even if you buy a seperate print profiling kit.
(...)

Huib
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=225612\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

O.K. I'm not opposed to Canon; what profiling kit do you suggest?
Logged
AlanG
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 195



WWW
« Reply #17 on: October 27, 2008, 10:23:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: HasselBas
O.K. I'm not opposed to Canon; what profiling kit do you suggest?


I have virtually no experience with the 6100 but I just ordered one after looking at it very closely at the PhotoPlus Expo in NYC. I have been using an Epson 7600 and decided to buy the new unit. Everything I read about it was positive and the prints I looked at were excellent.  

It was a deal that I couldn't pass up. Midwest Photo is selling it for $2149 delivered.  (The place I bought it from matched the price and gave me a $100 roll of paper too.) And for units bought before the end of October, Canon is giving a rebate of $500 in paper.  It comes only with 90ml starter cartridges but as there are 12 of them, I figure the ink is worth about $600.  So deducting the paper and the ink, the printer costs about $950 and if I can sell my 7600 for any reasonable price, I'll do pretty well.  I guess Canon expects to make money off of me from future ink sales.


Logged

Alan Goldstein
Goldsteinphoto website

I have a new fine art project. Please take a look:
Fine art site

Galleries of images at Photoshelter:
Galleries
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5499


WWW
« Reply #18 on: October 27, 2008, 10:40:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: AlanG
So deducting the paper and the ink, the printer costs about $950 and if I can sell my 7600 for any reasonable price, I'll do pretty well.  I guess Canon expects to make money off of me from future ink sales.

And print heads...since Canon charges about $600 per head (it takes two), depending on the the amount of printing you do, it'll cost you about $1200 to replace the heads. Just pointing that out as Michael found out after doing what he thought was not a huge amount of printing and having to replace his heads. Many people do not factor this cost in when they buy. HP charges $30-40/head (replaceable individually) and Epsons rarely need head replacements (you hope).
Logged
AlanG
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 195



WWW
« Reply #19 on: October 27, 2008, 10:55:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Schewe
And print heads...since Canon charges about $600 per head (it takes two), depending on the the amount of printing you do, it'll cost you about $1200 to replace the heads. Just pointing that out as Michael found out after doing what he thought was not a huge amount of printing and having to replace his heads. Many people do not factor this cost in when they buy. HP charges $30-40/head (replaceable individually) and Epsons rarely need head replacements (you hope).

Yes very expensive and I don't know why, although you can get them for a little bit less. ($1000-$1100) They are supposed to be good for around 1100 24x36 inch prints. So about $1 per print at this size.  And I figure that I am not printing such a high volume to go though the heads very quickly.  I don't know how many prints Michael got and I wonder if this was normal wear or head failure. (Reports I read showed few needed replacement but a couple failed under warranty.)   Of course this could still be the bug in the ointment, but if I end up selling so many prints, the cost of the heads won't bother me too much, or perhaps it will be so long from now that a new printer will be a better choice at that time.  I think I would have stuck with the 7600 if I had to spend $3000 - $4000 on a new printer.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2008, 11:04:59 PM by AlanG » Logged

Alan Goldstein
Goldsteinphoto website

I have a new fine art project. Please take a look:
Fine art site

Galleries of images at Photoshelter:
Galleries
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad