Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

A3 printer choice, Canon or Epson?


Little Jo e2
13 2.3k United Kingdom
19 Oct 2008 4:52PM

Quote:Quote:Most of my printing will be on glossy paper so is this possibly not the best choice for me then?


Have a look at the Canon 9000 Pro instead - it's designed for glossy media and Canon even do a special high gloss media to go with it.

Jo

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Woofmix 6 69 United Kingdom
21 Oct 2008 6:17PM
UPDATE!!!

I have just bought a Canon Pro9000!!!

After reading reviews again etc I decided it was a fine printer, maybe not quite up to the R2880 or 9500 performance but it does seem to print extremely well on glossy paper which is what I'll be using, but the real cruncher the one I bought is an Ex demo model with a 2 year warranty and 100 less than the new price (and 200 less than the R2880), the ink cartridges are the same as the IP4500 I already own so I have some spares and I have 270 A4 sheets of various Canon photo paper that I can't bear to waste.

Thanks for all the advice and opinions Smile

Paul
floreus 10 106 1
22 Oct 2008 12:48AM
Excellent! Let us know if you're happy with it Smile
madmoon 3 2 United Kingdom
20 Sep 2011 12:11AM
Hi, I was very interested in this thread, in particular the comments about the Canon not clogging up. Is this a general plus do you think for the Canon? I have had 3 Epsons over the last 12 years, my current in an R800, it's driving me mad with heads clogging all the time. Even just a few months from new it started, and the cleaning cycles are so frequent that 30 - 40 % of the ink is spent straight into a chunk of foam, I estimate 5 a cycle. Sometimes it goes through a cleaning cycle mid print run, it clogs itself up and then continues printing with banding everywhere, all this with genuine inks. I am thinking of the switch to either the pro 9000 or 9500 Mk II, even if the print quality is not quite up to the best Epson I'd trade this for reliability. I'm really interested in any long term reports of either Canon models before I make a decision... Cheers
indemnity 6 331
20 Sep 2011 1:15AM
With printing now being provided at economic rates, it makes one think whether it's worth investing in a printer, inks and paper. I have 2 printers both Canon, the A3+ is under a heap of files that need sorting, the A4 multi is a great scanner/photocopier. By the time you calibrate etc, not worth the bother imho.
dcash29 9 2.0k England
20 Sep 2011 8:16AM

Quote:Linda - If/when I do buy an A3 printer, I am going to be buying one of these


Although you could think of one of these or some of these

Dave
User_Removed 5 4.6k 1 Scotland
20 Sep 2011 11:51AM
This thread has been resurrected after 3 years in the doldrums, so I doubt if the OP is still interested.

But, for what it's worth, I have been using an Epson R1900 for a couple of years and am thoroughly satisfied with it. A number of competitions have been won with prints I produced on it. I guess that the cost per A3+ print is about 5 for paper and ink. Normally, I will have made about 3 or 4 prints before I am satisfied with the result for competition or exhibition - so say 20 per image. The reason for that is that, although my printer is cross-calibrated to both my monitors for each of the paper types I use (using ColorMunki), even though a print may be identical to what I see on my screens, once I get it printed on paper there may still be minor changes I decide to make - e.g. trying different paper types to suit the particular image.

Last week's AP did a test review of the new Epson R2000 which replaces the R1900 and it has larger ink cartridges. Although the cost per cc of the inks is roughly the same, you should lose a lower proportion of the inks as a result of cartridge replacement.

The conclusion of the review was that the R2000 was a superb "amateur" printer with good improvements on the R1900 - but not enough to justify anyone upgrading from the R1900 to the R2000.

Personally, I am almost at the point of upgrading to the "professional" R3000 because of its somewhat better performance on monochromes (although some of my monochromes from the R1900 have won competitions - I guess I am now at the stage of being prepared to "waste" money on very small improvements, which is not necessarily a prudent course for a beginner to follow).

.
Ade_Osman e2
11 4.5k 36 England
20 Sep 2011 4:44PM
Maybe of interest to some, but I had an email from Maplins today advertising a A3 scanner/printer, seemed like a good deal to me but I wouldn't know what the quality is like, more details HERE though.....

Ade

Just found it it even cheaper on Amazon at a 118 quid........

Must be a heap of junk Grin Who knows.....LOL
psiman 11 551 Wales
20 Sep 2011 5:42PM

Quote:I had an email from Maplins today advertising a A3 scanner/printer
having read the reviews on Amazon I'd say its OK as a general purpose printer for relatively light use but it isn't a photo quality printer so don't expect too much of it in that department!

Simon
thatmanbrian 3 342 3 United Kingdom
22 Sep 2011 11:00PM
I've been using a Canon Pro9500 for quite a while with no problems and excellent results. Don't worry too much about only using Canon paper on a Canon printer. I use cheap Staples own brand for glossy A4 and FotoSpeed for A3+ satin and used a colour munki to create profiles. This isn't essential as Fotospeed provide profiles for free and the Staples paper doesn't seem to need any special settings.

I will say I miss the ability of my old Epson to print on roll paper as I often print panoramas. Also, there aren't any third party inks for the larger Canon printers.

Brian
madmoon 3 2 United Kingdom
26 Sep 2011 7:45PM
Thanks Brian, useful feedback. Yes it is a shame about the lack of a roll facility, I haven't used a roll on the R800 but have fed a long strip of paper cut off an A2 sheet. I assume this isn't possible on the 9500 II either if the max size is A3+ (whatever this is in inches). The cheapest inks I can find are on www.7dayshop.com (genuine) about 9.50 each, like you say, no compatible brand listed. If most of the ink isn't used cleaning the print nozzles then running costs should be reasonable - but printing A3 is never going to be cheap is it. I also have a batch of unopened Epson premium paper to use up, sounds like the Canon should still work with this. Seeing LeftForum's comments my costs with the R800 have been quite modest! :-0
lemmy 7 2.0k United Kingdom
27 Sep 2011 11:18PM
Leaving aside the technicalities, I had an Epson printer that went wrong out of guarantee. I emailed Epson service, they came next day to take it away and 3 days later I had it back, working, of course.

Fir that reason, I've bought Epson since.
thatmanbrian 3 342 3 United Kingdom
28 Sep 2011 8:46AM
You were lucky lemmy! As I've commented on other posts, Epson had no obligation to help you. The retailer did though.
lemmy 7 2.0k United Kingdom
28 Sep 2011 10:34AM

Quote:Epson had no obligation to help you. The retailer did though.


I had bought the printer in Caen while I lived in France, so it was impractical to take it back having moved in the meantime to London. The printer was 15 months old so as far as I was concerned the fault was arguably down to wear and tear. I didn't ask Epson to repair it for me under warranty , just wanted it repaired.

I hear what you say but I still think that was good service from Epson.
thatmanbrian 3 342 3 United Kingdom
28 Sep 2011 4:32PM
Absolutely - very good of Epson, didn't mean to denigrate them, just to point out that the first instinct - to contact the maker - isn't the right one. Paton the back to Epson!Grin

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.