Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Canon 6400/6300 vs 8400/8300 cut sheet paper feed path question  (Read 3039 times)
sfblue
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 63


WWW
« on: December 04, 2012, 10:13:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi, I'm looking to buy one of the new Canon printers (coming from the Epson 7900).  I've read about the curved paper path of the Canons compared to the Epsons and by and large it doesn't seem to be problematic.  However, I've read a couple things implying that the paper path of the 44 inch 8400 or 8300 was more curved than the 6400/6300.  (Also read the wiki that early on there were problems with epson exhibition fiber scratching through the 8300).  Also, is there any problem with feeding smaller sheets-- e.g. letter size.   Can anyone shed any light on this please?

Any other comments on these printers is welcome as well.  It's taken me a little while to come around from Epson, but I'm pretty sure I'll get a 6400/6450, or possibly the 8400 as the economics are compelling.   

Thanks,

Dan
Logged
JeffKohn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #1 on: December 04, 2012, 10:56:54 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't recall the paper path being substantially different between the two for cut sheets. The main difference is the minimum margins. Letter-sized sheets are pretty much useless on the 8300, because the minimum margins mean you can't even fit an 8x10". These printers are at their best printing off rolls, if I did mostly sheets I would prefer something like the Epson 3880.

I've never used EEF because of the heavy OBA content; but I've used plenty of other fine art papers, some of which were pretty stiff, and scratching hasn't been a problem.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2012, 10:19:58 AM by JeffKohn » Logged

sfblue
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 63


WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 04, 2012, 11:27:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks very much for the answer Jeff. I'm just trying to understand everything about the printer, before taking the plunge.  The local Calumet used to have the Canons on display also, but now just have an Epson out so I don't have a place where I can take a look in person.  And I'm probably close to 50/50 roll vs cut sheet, but I still like the ease of flatness with sheets.  The EEF example just happened to be what I read about before. 
Logged
BarbaraArmstrong
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 288


« Reply #3 on: December 05, 2012, 01:30:08 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm just beginning to use my 8300 (bought during the big rebate period).  The 3880 is definitely much easier to use for letter-sized cut sheets.  You just drop one into the 3880 back slot and it works.  I'm talking about nice somewhat thicker fineart paper; I use the Canson Platine a lot.  On the 8300, you have to line the side edge of the paper up with a line on the printer.  There is a video online that shows this quite well; I don't remember the site.  Basically, you raise a lever that opens the slot you're slipping the paper into, then place the paper, lining it up with the side line on the printer.  Then lower the lever.  The lever is where your right hand would rest when standing in front of the printer; it is easy to operate, and the lever feels good in the hand.  The printer then pulls the paper in, and tells you if it isn't lined up correctly.  If not, you get to start over.  Give me some more time to work with the printer, and I'll be able to tell you how often I get it right on the first try!  I expect to be using the printer quite a bit with cut sheets.  I chose the Canon to avoid the problems frequently cited with the large Epsons, and don't expect to be overwhelmed by the paper insertion process.  Roll paper is easy to install; the roll is positioned at the front of the printer, just below where you would be inserting a cut sheet.  I don't know how different the 8400 may be.  --Barbara
Logged
BarbaraArmstrong
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 288


« Reply #4 on: December 05, 2012, 01:32:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Just to add, I ran a letter-size sheet of the Canson Platine through with no problems.  Whatever the path is, it didn't do anything to the paper.  And the print was lovely, even better than I was hoping for.  --Barbara
Logged
samueljohnchia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 260


« Reply #5 on: December 05, 2012, 02:00:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Dan,

I used to own an iPF5000 printer, and now I have an iPF8100 printer. I discovered and helped diagnose a design fault with the paper feed rollers in the automatic roll unit of the iPF5000 printer with two Canon printer technicians, and we took apart the iPF5000, iPF5100 (identical to the iPF5000) and iPF6100 printer and studied the paper feed path and mechanism. They are based on the same design. The iPF6300 is identical to the iPF6100 too in terms of the feed path. I do not know the exact details about the 6400 or the 8400, but I am quite sure that they are similar to the models that they replace. If someone else knows otherwise, please correct me.

I have attached a diagram which shows the paper feed path of the 5X00/6X00 printers and the 8X00 series printers. I prefer the feed path of the 8X00 series printer because the paper's natural curl is not forced to bend into a straight path, as the Epson 9900s do. There was at least someone else who reported here having headstrikes with really curly papers, from paper bulging up after passing through the pinch rollers, because of the "memory curl" from the roll. I haven't faced any issues with curly papers on my iPF8100 printer, and I like this design for roll printing.

I really don't like how the iPF6X00 printers have to the bend the paper in the opposite direction of its natural curl. Fragile papers like Harman by Hahnemuhle Gloss Baryta can be easily marked. Other baryta papers seem to be tougher though, and I don't really see issues with the 6X00 printers generally speaking.

Unfortunately, as others have mentioned, all these large format printers are really designed to be used with roll papers. I have been testing some Canson papers recently, and I am very pleased by how quickly the papers flatten out after leaving the printer, for all matte, Platine and baryta types.

If you need to print on metals, and stiff board material, the Epsons are definitely ideal because of their straight feed path.
Logged
sfblue
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 63


WWW
« Reply #6 on: December 05, 2012, 12:58:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Interesting.  So the path for the 6x00s is actually straighter? than the 8x00s but this is a disadvantage for roll paper as it goes against the natural curl.  I had never thought of that. 

And on sheet feeds?  is it a straighter feed for the 6x00s than the 8x00s?  I was under the impression there were two different methods/places to sheet feed on the 6x00, but not on the 8x00.

Thanks.
Logged
Czornyj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1399



WWW
« Reply #7 on: December 05, 2012, 04:31:29 PM »
ReplyReply

I have iPF6350 to iPF8300, so here's my 2 cents.

I much prefer iPF8300 for sheet printing. In theory iPF6xx0 has sheet feeder, and in case of iPF8x00 you have to align sheet to a red line on a platen. In practice however the iPF8x00 loading is faster, more convenient in use, measures both dimensions of paper sheet, and works flawlessly with the thickest papers.

In case of iPF6350 the sheet loading took more time - you have to enter the second dimension of paper manually, it often rejects paper while loading, and damages the surface of paper, which was especially annoying when I had to print on double sides. I had none of these issues on iPF8300 - I just put the sheet and print.
Logged

sfblue
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 63


WWW
« Reply #8 on: December 05, 2012, 04:47:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the comments.  I dug through the Canon site on specs and it looks like the 6400/6450 are listed as having options for both top load and front load for sheets whereas the 8400 just lists a front load option for sheets.   One last question:  Is one of the options on the 6400/6300 a flat paper path if I were going to occasionally print on posterboard and experiment with metal?  Or is it still curved?

Thanks. 
Logged
samueljohnchia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 260


« Reply #9 on: December 05, 2012, 07:44:30 PM »
ReplyReply

The 6x00 printers share the same paper path for sheet as well as roll printing. I do not have much experience with sheet feeding on the 6x00 printers so I cannot tell you if there is a good method that minimizes risk of paper damage. I'm not surprised that Czornyj is having issues with front loading, given the inherent design. I don't think you will find a true straight paper path in Canon current ipf large format 12 ink printers.

Might want to keep your Epson 7900 around for the occasional metal and board request.
Logged
samueljohnchia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 260


« Reply #10 on: December 05, 2012, 08:05:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Interesting.  So the path for the 6x00s is actually straighter? than the 8x00s but this is a disadvantage for roll paper as it goes against the natural curl.  I had never thought of that.

To my way of thinking, the "straightest" paper path is one that best mimics the natural shape of the paper. Often, cut sheets are also not perfectly flat because of manufacturing, storage and printing atmospheric differences, different amounts of anti-curl coating applied to the back etc. Baryta papers tend to bend upwards on the long end of the cut sheet. If the printer adaptively morphs according to the actual paper shape, that is the "straightest" paper path relative to the paper, and minimizes paper damage.
Logged
smjphoto
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


« Reply #11 on: December 06, 2012, 03:21:38 AM »
ReplyReply

I noticed you are in the SF bay area in your profile.  Im not sure where you are located ...but there is a place in Santa Clara that has a working 8300 or 8400 on the floor. The owner is very knowledgable and hands on. His name is Peter, 1 (408) 299-0680 at Plotter Pros. They are a large format printer and plotter shop, not a camera store. I think they are a servicing dealer, also.
I found them very helpful and the prices matched the Internet offers when I was in the market.
YMMV

Or if mid peninsula is more convenient and you just want to try a few prints on the 8300, send me a pm. I've got no expertise, as I'm new to canon, also. So far, I'm very pleased.
Stuart



1 (408) 299-0680
Logged
sfblue
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 63


WWW
« Reply #12 on: December 06, 2012, 12:36:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Stuart-- just wanted to say thanks for the info and the kind offer.  I think I'm all set-- planning to get a Canon 6450.  Just need to sleep on it a night before I commit to leaving the Epson fold (currently have a 7900 and have had several epsons prior to this).  You say that you are new to Canon-- are you also switching from Epson?  I'm in SF btw.  Thanks again. 
Logged
nemophoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 486



WWW
« Reply #13 on: December 06, 2012, 05:37:22 PM »
ReplyReply

I own both the 6100 and the 8300, and they are fundementally VERY different in sheet handling. The 6100 (for all intent and purpose, the same as the 6400 for paper feed) is a curved, rear feed. The 8300 (8400) is a flat front feed. I've done a fair amount of sheet feeds with both and it's important to note that letter size is the smallest you can feed. The 6100 is ever so slightly easier to feed, but once you get use to the handling of the 8300, it's almost as fast to feed  sheet. The huge difference is that the 8x00 are significantly faster than their 6x00 counterparts in printing that 8.5x11.
Logged

sfblue
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 63


WWW
« Reply #14 on: December 06, 2012, 06:10:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Nemo-- I'm not sure what's changed, but the canon site lists the 6400 and 6450 as:
"Roll Feed: One Roll, front output
Top Loading Manual Feed: One sheet, front output
Front Loading Manual Feed: One sheet, front output"

whereas the 8400 is only:
"   Roll Feed: One Roll, front output
Front Loading Manual Feed: One sheet, front output"

I found this video on the old ipf6300 which shows the top feed much like the Epsons sheet feed; it is right around the 2 minute mark of the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q49giyQaItk

The difference between this and the Epson is that the Epson sheet exits straight out of the bottom.  Regardless, it does seem like the the sheet feed of the 6400 is less curved than the 8400 which only offers the front feed/front output option for cut sheets.
Logged
nemophoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 486



WWW
« Reply #15 on: December 06, 2012, 06:24:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Actually, guess I should have been clearer. Yes, the 6x00 feeds both top and front. What I was trying to point out was that the 6x00 has guides to help with single sheet feed, whereas the 8x00 uses just guidelines which take a little more practice to load. My speed on High (quality) is slightly over a minute for letter size on my 8300. My 6100 is about 2
And change and it seems to do a lot more mechanical groans and checks before actually printing. The 16-bit plugin for Photoshops feels fast as well. I say "feels" because I haven't really times it.
Logged

smjphoto
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


« Reply #16 on: December 06, 2012, 09:05:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Dan,
Yes I moved from epson, also. I've had the 4000 and 4880 (currently for sale.....). I've had excelent results w both of them. I was planning on getting a used epson 44" but found the canon new with full inks cheaper than a used epson and a set of smaller inks, not to mention the Internet horror stories for the 9900 ( yes, I know LOTS of people have no problems). Additionally, the canons have a better reputation of not clogging with small volume users. That was very persuasive, though I now understand the canon version of the same issue is early head failure and ridiculous repair service rates. I also like the idea of not having to swap blck/ mat inks as in the 9600, 9800, 9880.
Anyway, I made the jump and am trying to get up to speed on all the small details that can make the difference in a good print or a great print. More of my learning curve is about new papers and profiles, handling large prints, mounting, displaying, etc. The printing is just the starting gate Smiley Not to mention the increase demands from the camera/ digital files to print large.

Good Luck with your purchase!
Logged
mstevensphoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 301


WWW
« Reply #17 on: December 07, 2012, 07:50:53 AM »
ReplyReply

this seems pretty well answered and I know your question wass about the paper path, but I've got to chinme in - with my workflow on the ipf8300 I've entirely given up on using cut sheets. it takes FOREVER. any largetr cut sheet requires at least a couple tries to get it to feet straight, having to open the printer to load it in is cumbersome. I either gang my prints on 24" rolls or use Kodak's 10" rolls. I keep my fingers crossed that moab will one day release a 10" roll. if sheet feeding was a major issue for me I would not consider this printer. I miss the ability to print one-off greeting cards on museo, but other than that the rol-onlyl use hasn't largely changed my life for the worse.
Logged
Schwetz
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #18 on: July 24, 2013, 03:10:15 AM »
ReplyReply

I have a 6300 and would maintain that its not really built for sheet feed. It will do it and print beautifully, but its a single sheet operation and takes ages to load/terminate.

http://www.schwetzstudios.co.uk
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad