Ad
Ad
Ad
Poll
Question: Thinking of ditching my Epson 3880 and switching to a Canon imagePrograf IPF6300.  Should I?
Canon - 17 (53.1%)
Epson - 15 (46.9%)
Total Voters: 32

Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Switching to Canon from Epson. Should I?  (Read 7768 times)
CityShooter
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« on: June 03, 2011, 02:25:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi guys,

I've been an Epson loyalist for years now, and I'm hear Canon is better.  Be great to have some feedback from all the wonks on here.  Hit me with your thoughts if you have them.  Thanks!
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7054


WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 03, 2011, 02:29:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi guys,

I've been an Epson loyalist for years now, and I'm hear Canon is better.  Be great to have some feedback from all the wonks on here.  Hit me with your thoughts if you have them.  Thanks!


How can any one seriously answer a question like that? Why are you thinking of changing? What kind of work do you do? What are your requirements? What are your expectations? What are your criteria?
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
Sven W
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 514


« Reply #2 on: June 03, 2011, 03:10:35 PM »
ReplyReply

I can.
Don't switch !

/Sven
Logged

Stockholm, Sweden
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7054


WWW
« Reply #3 on: June 03, 2011, 03:16:33 PM »
ReplyReply

I can.
Don't switch !

/Sven


Huh? On what basis are you advising 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
Sven W
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 514


« Reply #4 on: June 03, 2011, 03:36:07 PM »
ReplyReply

After ten years of printing with Epson LFP, 4000, 9600, 4800, 7880, 4900, 9900, 11880 and GS6000, I tested both the IFP 6300 and 8300, and when the OP ask such question, I answer: Don't switch to Canon. That's my opinion.

/Sven
« Last Edit: June 03, 2011, 03:38:12 PM by Sven W » Logged

Stockholm, Sweden
bill t.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2711


WWW
« Reply #5 on: June 03, 2011, 03:41:05 PM »
ReplyReply

I can't answer your question per se.  But beyond Canon versus Epson issues consider that swapping printers can be a very big deal that takes a lot of time and effort.

I switched mainly because my Epson was seriously high mileage and the Canon was almost a give away and I had a block of time to do the transition.  And nozzle issues with my 20+ liter printing heads were getting out of control.  Lacking any one of those it would have been a bad idea.

In addition to mere physical installation and learning curve time, you will also probably have to re-tweak your images, remake profiles, and much more.  I completely failed to anticipate the work involved in reprocessing and reproofing my image library.

Quality wise the Canon wins hands down over the 9880, but I don't know about the 9900. 
Logged
Light Seeker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255


« Reply #6 on: June 03, 2011, 05:41:12 PM »
ReplyReply

I have and use, both an Epson 3800 and a Canon 8300. I could provide a perspective that might be helpful but I agree with Mark, there's limited value in my sharing what I might do if I were in your situation.

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

Posts: 7054


WWW
« Reply #7 on: June 03, 2011, 06:56:02 PM »
ReplyReply

I have and use, both an Epson 3800 and a Canon 8300. I could provide a perspective that might be helpful but I agree with Mark, there's limited value in my sharing what I might do if I were in your situation.

Terry.

True at least until one knows what the "situation" of the OP is!

This thread isn't moving beyond assertions - not a very productive or useful discussion of what could be an interesting topic.
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
enduser
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 277


« Reply #8 on: June 03, 2011, 11:29:14 PM »
ReplyReply

For several years now we have watched and participated in many forums where printing is a focus.   My opinion based on that is merely to share my feelings about the two brands.

It is clear that there are many more postings about clogging in Epson printers, Canon very little.   This seems to be to do with how each handles clogs.  Canons do clog but a system of analyzing where clogs happen and re-mapping the heads so as to keep printing works well. The downside comes when clogging is too widespread on the head and a new $500 one is needed, followed by the second one failing soon after.

Epson tries to clean heads as it goes, often using much ink as it does so.  It seems to me that you can therefor get your frustrations bit by bit with Epson, or as a big hit when you need to spend $1000 on new heads.  At that point, at today's prices the Canon is a throwaway, IT supplies now offering a 6100 for $1799 with 24 starter 90ml cartridges thrown in.

We use ipf6100s and like them.  I'm sure if we had Epsons we'd like them too.
Logged
wtlloyd
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 127


« Reply #9 on: June 03, 2011, 11:53:32 PM »
ReplyReply

3 months now with Epson 4900 - zero clogs. I turn the printer off generally, after printing.

The 4000 and 4800 I  had prior to this printer would have needed a dozen nozzle checks with auto cleaning, at least, in those three months. I never ran power cleans, preferring to wait and re-run nozzle checks until good...

This 4900 has nozzle clogs beat, finally.
Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2929



WWW
« Reply #10 on: June 04, 2011, 03:10:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Interesting 1st post ... because he "hears" Canon is better (with no definition of better) wants to know if he should switch (hint, if your Epson 3880 prints aren't fantastic, it is NOT the 3880's fault), wants advice and then calls us all wonks?  That's not a particularly flattering term in any of it's definitions, and in some it's down right insulting.

Of course then to assume because Canon is "better" (hey my buddy said so), and to extrapolate out that a generation old ipf5100 is better ... now there's a stretch.  The ipf6300 and 3880 print quality wise are terrific and very close ... certainly worthy of comparisons ... but both are better than a model introduced in 2007 (not that it's bad, it just isn't as good as any of the current printers)

Since it's a 3880 we're talking about the whole clog nozzle part of the discussion doesn't apply since they rarely clog.  I think I've cleared less than 10 clogs on my several year old 3800 that sits idle for weeks at a time most of the time.

Logged

Czornyj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1436



WWW
« Reply #11 on: June 04, 2011, 05:03:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Countless amount of aspects can make a specific printer "better", so I find any general statements stupid.

From my point of view - iPF5100 is faster, more economic, it prints from a roll and has a cutter, contrary to SP3880. I'd sacrifice the fact that qualitywise LUCIA II is little bit worse than Ultrachrome K3 VM for better productivity and versatility, or wait for iPF5300 with LUCIA EX.

I've also used Epson printers for years, and didn't like iPF at first glance. But in the end I switched to iPF6350 and now I don't look back. Not that it's "better", but because it simply works better for me, YMMV.

« Last Edit: June 04, 2011, 05:07:57 AM by Czornyj » Logged

Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7054


WWW
« Reply #12 on: June 04, 2011, 06:09:18 AM »
ReplyReply

3 months now with Epson 4900 - zero clogs. I turn the printer off generally, after printing.

This 4900 has nozzle clogs beat, finally.

Actually it doesn't. I'm pleased if it works fine for you, but mine shows Cyan channel clogs if not used for a few days in a row. Do you print daily?
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: 7054


WWW
« Reply #13 on: June 04, 2011, 06:22:58 AM »
ReplyReply

I think I've cleared less than 10 clogs on my several year old 3800 that sits idle for weeks at a time most of the time.



Wayne, yes, that was my experience too with the 3800. In this respect, my accumulating experience indicates the 4900 is a step backward.
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
JohnBrew
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 759


WWW
« Reply #14 on: June 04, 2011, 06:54:21 AM »
ReplyReply

After four years with a 3800 I finally had a clog - but it was one which could not be cleared and resulted in the demise of the machine. I replaced it with a 3880. I'm not exactly over the moon with the new "vivid magenta" but I wouldn't change to Canon. I still see it as a toss-up either way.
Logged

deanwork
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 740


« Reply #15 on: June 04, 2011, 09:17:42 AM »
ReplyReply

I use the 44" Canon now and it has been the easiest system I've ever set up from day one. So far it's been a dream for color and I haven't worked with monochrome yet.

However, I've used the 3800 and 3880 on occasion and I have to say I think this is the best design Epson has ever made. Back in the old days I always wanted something that would produce 16x20s color and bw with all media on the fly like that and take up very little space. The quality is outstanding and it's like half the  size of the Canon 5100. It's a great sharp printer for smallish prints. I actually wish I had one my self to play around with. They also don't seem to have a lot of the issues that the 4000 series has had in regard to ink starvation, etc. I can't understand why Canon has to make these desktop units so damn big. If I were going to buy something that massive I'd certainly buy a 24" printer of any of the brands, and have a much bigger print size available.

john
Logged
Thelo
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #16 on: June 04, 2011, 02:01:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi guys,

I've been an Epson loyalist for years now, and I'm hear Canon is better.  Be great to have some feedback from all the wonks on here.  Hit me with your thoughts if you have them.  Thanks!


Being a newbie rather than a wonk I would like to add my opinion into this thread.

No, You should not switch. Why? Because I think You shouldn´t  base Your decisions on what You hear. I think You should find out the facts and base Your decisions on them.
Logged
wtlloyd
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 127


« Reply #17 on: June 04, 2011, 04:49:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Actually it doesn't. I'm pleased if it works fine for you, but mine shows Cyan channel clogs if not used for a few days in a row. Do you print daily?

No, sometimes a week or two between printing. Well, let me state explicitly that in the same environment, the 4900 has not yet shown ANY of the multiple clogs I was getting from my 4800.
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7054


WWW
« Reply #18 on: June 04, 2011, 07:39:00 PM »
ReplyReply

No, sometimes a week or two between printing. Well, let me state explicitly that in the same environment, the 4900 has not yet shown ANY of the multiple clogs I was getting from my 4800.

I agree, it's a big improvement over the 4800, and it allows for cleaning two channels at a time, which saves ink; but at least in my case, it clogs much more than my former 3800, which hardly ever clogged, same environment too.
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
mikev1
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 135


« Reply #19 on: June 04, 2011, 09:15:11 PM »
ReplyReply

How often will you be using it?  What will you be printing on?

Each printer has it's pros and cons. 

If not using it a lot it might not matter much either way what you choose.
If you will be printing a lot and experience troubles with the Epson it will drive you nuts and cost you a lot of time and media.
If you will be changing rolls several times a day the Canon will likely drive you nuts and eat your fingers at some point.
Just kidding about that last part, though the Canon loading process leaves a lot to be desired.

If you live in a dry climate you will have to work real hard at keeping the humidity up more so for the Epson than the Canon.

I have both and I am trying to get away from printing canvas and fine art matte papers on the Epson.  I think part of my clogging issues are coming from paper dust.  Not using the automated cutter might help but I'm too lazy for that.

I hope to end up printing mainly just the luster paper on the 9900 as any dropped channels or clogs that arise won't be as costly as they are with canvas.

If there is a big price difference take the cheaper one.

Talk to your dealer and ask them about any issues they are hearing from their clients.  I've talked to a few and it is pretty clear which one they hear the most troubles about.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad