Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Canon iPF6450 review  (Read 5283 times)
keith_cooper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 454



WWW
« on: July 22, 2013, 11:27:48 AM »
ReplyReply

It's taken a while, but I've just finished one of the longer printer reviews I've written, covering the iPF6450.

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/printer/canon_ipf6450-pt1.html

There also reviews of several papers used during testing, and the optional spectrophotometer unit (SU-21). I do have more data about some aspects, but they're rather long pages as it is ;-)

Hope they're of some interest...
Logged

deanwork
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 722


« Reply #1 on: July 25, 2013, 07:09:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Keith,

Are you seeing that the additional light gray ink is improving the tonal ramp in the light values of black and white? It should.

Is TBW set up to handle this new inkset?

john


Logged
rvonmayr
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 26



WWW
« Reply #2 on: July 25, 2013, 11:51:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the terrific amount of work that you did in creating this review.  It was very useful for me as I consider my 24" printer options.

Cheers!
Logged

Best Regards,
Robert
keith_cooper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 454



WWW
« Reply #3 on: July 26, 2013, 03:02:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Is TBW set up to handle this new inkset?

The iPFx400 printers use the same basic inks as the x300 printers.  The extra grey is only in the PRO-1 at the moment.
TBW worked just fine with the 6450, my only (relatively minor) quibbles with it come in the usability side of things, not print quality.

The x400 printers do seem to use slightly less ink than before, and one reason (I was told) is a wider use of the greys in colour. This aspect isn't easy to test, since the accounting data option still isn't there for Mac users and recording the numbers manually to compare just goes way past my patience levels ;-)
Logged

samueljohnchia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 325


« Reply #4 on: July 26, 2013, 05:23:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Keith, thank you for your review. I was wondering if you noticed that the non-color managed output of the x4x0 series Canons are very warm, especially when compared to the x300 series printers? Scott Martin briefly mentioned it here.
Logged
keith_cooper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 454



WWW
« Reply #5 on: July 26, 2013, 06:36:05 AM »
ReplyReply

I'd not noticed that, however I didn't really compare the output of my iPF8300 to the 6450 I was testing until after making profiles, and even then it was only a fairly high level check. I don't have the old profiling targets from when I set up the 8300 and running the 8300 comes out of my own pocket ;-)

There is a difference in the B&W print mode, which suggests there would be in the colour. A few direct comparison prints with the 8300 didn't show enough though for me to want to test further.

I always assume that if I go from one series of printer to the next, there will be some difference - hopefully positive.

I do have to admit though that you'll never get many detailed numerical comparisons and analysis in my reviews, my patience usually runs out long before that sort of stuff ;-) I did measure quite a lot of prints in the B&W print mode though.
Logged

JohnBrew
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 753


WWW
« Reply #6 on: July 26, 2013, 07:22:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Keith, thank you for your work. It was helpful for me. A few observations:
I've quit trying to use the Canon (I have a 6400) in single sheet print mode. When you've been printing from rolls, going to single sheet just seems to confuse the Canon and then once you have it straightened out no matter what I do it absolutely refuses to center the print (on single sheet) so I find it's quicker to use my 3880.

Also, I've found the Lucia black inks metamerize on the Harman by Hahnemuhle Gloss Baryta whereas the Epson does not, which was quite a surprise.
« Last Edit: July 26, 2013, 07:28:13 AM by JohnBrew » Logged

keith_cooper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 454



WWW
« Reply #7 on: July 26, 2013, 07:49:16 AM »
ReplyReply

The neutrality of the B&W print mode does seem to vary quite a lot on some papers, under changes in lighting. This is one reason I did a bit more work on looking at the B&W side of printing in the review.

The Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Bright White initially showed a slight magenta tone under tungsten lighting (no fluorescents in any part of my home I spend time in ;-)
This was largely avoidable with a slight adjustment to the B/W print settings. For B&W printed on such a paper, I'm much more likely to use 'natural white' paper for my own work.
Logged

samueljohnchia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 325


« Reply #8 on: July 26, 2013, 09:29:56 AM »
ReplyReply

I'd not noticed that, however I didn't really compare the output of my iPF8300 to the 6450 I was testing until after making profiles, and even then it was only a fairly high level check. I don't have the old profiling targets from when I set up the 8300 and running the 8300 comes out of my own pocket ;-)

There is a difference in the B&W print mode, which suggests there would be in the colour. A few direct comparison prints with the 8300 didn't show enough though for me to want to test further.

I always assume that if I go from one series of printer to the next, there will be some difference - hopefully positive.

I do have to admit though that you'll never get many detailed numerical comparisons and analysis in my reviews, my patience usually runs out long before that sort of stuff ;-) I did measure quite a lot of prints in the B&W print mode though.

Thank you for the information. I noticed this when I was making some test prints at my dealer's. I was using an iPF6460 (south-east asian naming for the 6450) and 8300. I personally own an iPF8100. The gray output was certainly very very warm on the new X400 series. Profiling appeared to rid the yellowing issue. I don't know how Scott tested that it didn't - but he definitely noticed the same issue as I did. I was printing on Epson Premium Luster paper, and also compared the output to the Epson 7900. My experience with this combination was that the Canon fared better than the Epson for not only metamerism, but also gloss differential, which was much better overall. However, I much preferred the dithering of the Epson - it was much finer, and difficult to see with the naked eye, whist the Canon, with the head height set to super low, and at the highest number of passes in the plug-in set, I could still easily see the dot pattern with the naked eye. It is irritating when making small prints with smooth tonal areas like sky. If only Canons could produce finer output.
Logged
Bullfrog
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 175


« Reply #9 on: July 28, 2013, 12:37:47 PM »
ReplyReply

I book mark your reviews - and refer to them often.  I am not yet in the market for a new printer - but if I understand you correctly, you state the printer cannot be moved without risking problems AFTER it is set up (with ink)

Is this true of all IPF printers - or just this one?

I have my printer in the basement .  To get there, you must negotiate a sharp corner (the staircase is l-shaped) and its impossible to keep the printer level.  Which tells me if I buy one of these things - and set it up - I cannot ever move it.

Logged
keith_cooper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 454



WWW
« Reply #10 on: July 28, 2013, 01:27:48 PM »
ReplyReply

All the iPF printers with sub-tanks exhibit this to some degree

There is I believe another thread with more on this?

I've had people from Canon bring printers in the back of cars, but once loaded with ink we tried to keep any tilt to less than 20 degrees or so (always on leaving my house, so the consequences occurred elsewhere if at all ;-)

You can set the transport mode, but it uses rather a lot of ink IIRC

It would be useful to know if anyone knew the actual amount of maximum 'tilt' on any axis ?
Logged

Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad