Epson or Canon Photo Printers (not AIO)


R

RSKT

Hi all,
I saw a Canon vs Epson thread but I am looking more at photo printers and
best photo quality.
Its time to replace my aging Epson R210.

Many years back, I owned an HP deskjet 400 but decided their quality was at
most third amongst the Top 3 (Epson, Canon, HP).
Canon almost died with crap quality when Epson released their 1440 dpi
printers (canon had standard 360dpi and premium model 600dpi) many years ago
but have since bounced back very strong in recent years.

The Epson R230 would have been a very good replacement but I also wanted
something of a later generation too. Problem is I want it in this small size
and both Canon and Epson seems to think we have alot of table space. All
their newer photo printers are huge! In anycase, would like to seek opinions
because since my first bubblejet (Canon BJ210) many years back, I have not
been using Canon since. I only need A4.

Here is what I have compared so far :

1. Epson uses 5 colours and 1 Black. Canon uses 3 colours and 2 blacks. That
seems to indicate Epson has an edge in colour rendition.

2. Epson cartridges cost slightly more than Canon ones but that does not say
anything about their price/capacity though. I was told the Canon print head
can be user purchased and replaced if needed but not sure if this applies to
the latest models. Epson's print head cannot be changed.

3 Epson has epson for thick matt photo paper which canon does not. This
gives really nice magazine-like matt prints.I do not like gloss.
Epson also appear to have a wider range of media to choose from.

4. Epson has its photo enhance mode. Canon has a "colour correction" mode.

5. Both can print CDs.

6. Canon has 9600x2400 dpi whereas Epson has 5760x1440 only.
(My current R210 only has 2880x1440 and it prints stunning photos already)

7. Canon can print multiple pages per page as well as double sided. Epson
cannot.

8. My scanner is an Epson Perfection V100. It works very well with the Epson
R210. Not sure about the canon.

Anyway, I am comparing the Epson R270/290 against the Canon IP46xx/IP45xx
series. Any views on this is appreciated.

Thanks in advance.
 
Ad

Advertisements

I

IntergalacticExpandingPanda

On Dec 13, 11:44 pm, "RSKT" > 1. Epson uses 5 colours and 1 Black.
Canon uses 3 colours and 2 blacks. That
seems to indicate Epson has an edge in colour rendition.

The Canon is a 4 color printer. Big black is for text and any black
in plain text mode. The little black is dye and is used in photos, at
least on the ip5200, I believe if something like like 60% black the
black cartridge kicks in.

2. Epson cartridges cost slightly more than Canon ones but that does not say
anything about their price/capacity though. I was told the Canon print head
can be user purchased and replaced if needed but not sure if this appliesto
the latest models. Epson's print head cannot be changed.

Capacity, I believe Epson r280 are smaller, but higher yield, as in
lower ml/page.
IIRC the clis were rated at about 280p % 5% coverage
Epson IIRC are rated for 390p @ 5% coverage
At least in the states you can buy multipacks for about $60 a set.

http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/Landing/InkYieldISO9.jsp

The Epsons are a tad frustrating since when you swap the cartridges,
it sparks a cleaning cycle and sucks off all the ink cartridges.

This doesn't include the blacks, where the Canon big black is
somewhere between 500-525p @ 5% coverage. This is not used for any
mode but plain paper. Small black is used for all other paper
selections, and duplex mode to some degree

R280 ink is rated as being more archival according to Wilhelm research

http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/R280.html

Canons are rated at 30 years under glass using their premium papers,
10 years bare bulb also premium paper.
6. Canon has 9600x2400 dpi whereas Epson has 5760x1440 only.
(My current R210 only has 2880x1440 and it prints stunning photos already)

These DPI numbers are pretty much meaningless. I'm not sure if the
canon's can take a 1200dpi image and render it as such. The new HP
can.

I don't have an r280 for testing, in fact my operational Epson is an
older generation 1280 that I just switched to pigment ink for
testing.
 
J

John Chapman

RSKT said:
Hi all,
I saw a Canon vs Epson thread but I am looking more at photo printers and
best photo quality.
Its time to replace my aging Epson R210
Over the last year I have changed from an Epson 830 to a Canon 4500.
My findings are that I never have clogged heads now.
I also find the Canon photo printing software to be excellent and very
easy to use.
I can change the printhead on my Canon if I need to.
Borderless photo prints are really stunning from the Canon.
The major advantage seems to be that the Epson would spend
loads of time and ink in cleaning the printhead.
Canon do not seem to need to do this.

Just in case you might think I am ***measekite*** I am pleased to
confirm I use non OEM inks in my Canon as I did in my
previous Epson.
 
A

Arthur Entlich

If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste,
I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog:

http://e-trashtalk.spaces.live.com/
Hi all,
I saw a Canon vs Epson thread but I am looking more at photo printers and
best photo quality.
Its time to replace my aging Epson R210.

Many years back, I owned an HP deskjet 400 but decided their quality was at
most third amongst the Top 3 (Epson, Canon, HP).
Canon almost died with crap quality when Epson released their 1440 dpi
printers (canon had standard 360dpi and premium model 600dpi) many years ago
but have since bounced back very strong in recent years.

The Epson R230 would have been a very good replacement but I also wanted
something of a later generation too. Problem is I want it in this small size
and both Canon and Epson seems to think we have alot of table space. All
their newer photo printers are huge! In anycase, would like to seek opinions
because since my first bubblejet (Canon BJ210) many years back, I have not
been using Canon since. I only need A4.

Here is what I have compared so far :

1. Epson uses 5 colours and 1 Black. Canon uses 3 colours and 2 blacks. That
seems to indicate Epson has an edge in colour rendition.

While the color gamut is a bit wider with the Epson, using the light
cyan and magenta, it also uses more ink up doing so, and requires more
cartridges. The light cyan and magenta are used up at about twice their
darker dye load colors, followed by yellow. However, the Canon uses a
smaller dot (although doesn't have the variability of dot sizes that
Epsons can offer. In most cases the 4 color Canon (CMYK +PigmentK) can
use as small as 1 picolitre dot volumes, The Epson photo printers
usually are 2-4 picolitre dot volume at the smallest.

Since the human eye can't resolve down to 1 picolitre dots, the Canon
mixes those very small dots with the white of the paper to make the
lighter cyan and magenta, while the Epson uses larger diluted color dots.


2. Epson cartridges cost slightly more than Canon ones but that does not say
anything about their price/capacity though. I was told the Canon print head
can be user purchased and replaced if needed but not sure if this applies to
the latest models. Epson's print head cannot be changed.

Canon heads are not permanent. The advantage is they are removable for
cleaning and replacement. The heads for Canon printers typically last
between 10-20 full sets of ink although some last much longer. Epson
heads are permanent and should last the life of the machine, in theory,
but they require more maintenance, in general to keep them trouble-free.
This can be done by the end user.

Canon cartridges are easier to refill with 3rd party inks. I think inks
costs are similar. One other issue with the Epson is that each time a
cartridge runs out and requires replacement, the printer goes through a
head purging process, with a fair amount of ink loss, and with 6
cartridges, and the light cyan and magenta running out fairly often, a
lot of ink can be wasted. I'm not sure if the Canon does the same type
of purging process with new cartridges, but being that there are less of
them, less ink would be wasted.
3 Epson has epson for thick matt photo paper which canon does not. This
gives really nice magazine-like matt prints.I do not like gloss.
Epson also appear to have a wider range of media to choose from.

Epson has a wider range of paper, 3rd party papers, and 3rd party inks
in part because the technology of the heads allows for a greater variety
of ink types and formulations to work with them.

4. Epson has its photo enhance mode. Canon has a "colour correction" mode.

Who really knows what that means...
5. Both can print CDs.

Yeap, with these models.
6. Canon has 9600x2400 dpi whereas Epson has 5760x1440 only.
(My current R210 only has 2880x1440 and it prints stunning photos already)

I would not fall for this stat hype. It is relatively meaningless
today. Look at speed of the print output, look at yield per cartridge
to determine ink costs. These resolution numbers are a game of
oneupmanship and do not reflect qualitative differences is the vast
majority of cases.
7. Canon can print multiple pages per page as well as double sided. Epson
cannot.

Multiple pages per page is a driver issue, and may depend on the
application you use. Duplexing is convenient if you do a lot of double
sided documents.
8. My scanner is an Epson Perfection V100. It works very well with the Epson
R210. Not sure about the canon.

It should work fine. The scanner is a autonomous device and if the
output is good either printer should be able to use that data successfully.
Anyway, I am comparing the Epson R270/290 against the Canon IP46xx/IP45xx
series. Any views on this is appreciated.

My views are more of general impressions rather than specific mode
comparisons. For the cost, both brands are good value.


Art
 
R

RSKT

Thanks everyone for your replies.
The research that I have obtained so far seems to be skewed towards Canon.
I must qualify by saying that I have been using Epson (first the Epson Photo
720 and presently the R210).
I use it for general printing, printing of matt photos and CD printing and
have absolutely no problem what-so-ever with them. Perhaps its because I
only use genuine inks (whether it is HP, Canon or Epson) even though
compatibles are easily available. I once killed my mom's old Canon printer
using cheap china-made alternatives!

As for my Epson, I am quite impressed with its print quality too but that
could mean I am not as fussy as well. If there's any dots or lines in my
prints, I can't seem to see them when the printer was new. The clogged
printhead is well documented and I do ensure I do regular cleaning and yes,
the ink cartridges do use up very fast that way! The printhead is a little
worn off now as my prints have faint horizontal lines that cannot be removed
by cleaning anymore.
That is why I am looking at the R270 or R290 as a replacement.
They seem to have better speed, enhanced photo processing mode and claria
inks for long lasting prints.

The Canon on the other hand has duplex and multipage printing and best of
all, lower acquisition and ink cost. The current available model is the
IP4680 which is proably a variant of this one :
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=184&modelid=17105

The IP4500 is not longer available, so I'm wondering if the 4680 is an
improvement over the 4500 or merely a lower cost version with some
tradeoffs.
Any "canoners" can comment?

Thanks all! :)
 
M

measekite

Hi all,
I saw a Canon vs Epson thread but I am looking more at photo printers and
best photo quality.
Its time to replace my aging Epson R210.

Many years back, I owned an HP deskjet 400 but decided their quality was at
most third amongst the Top 3 (Epson, Canon, HP).
Canon almost died with crap quality when Epson released their 1440 dpi
printers (canon had standard 360dpi and premium model 600dpi) many years ago
but have since bounced back very strong in recent years.

The Epson R230 would have been a very good replacement but I also wanted
something of a later generation too. Problem is I want it in this small size
and both Canon and Epson seems to think we have alot of table space. All
their newer photo printers are huge! In anycase, would like to seek opinions
because since my first bubblejet (Canon BJ210) many years back, I have not
been using Canon since. I only need A4.

Here is what I have compared so far :

1. Epson uses 5 colours and 1 Black. Canon uses 3 colours and 2 blacks. That
seems to indicate Epson has an edge in colour rendition.

2. Epson cartridges cost slightly more than Canon ones but that does not say
anything about their price/capacity though. I was told the Canon print head
can be user purchased and replaced if needed but not sure if this applies to
the latest models. Epson's print head cannot be changed.

3 Epson has epson for thick matt photo paper which canon does not. This
gives really nice magazine-like matt prints.I do not like gloss.
Epson also appear to have a wider range of media to choose from.

4. Epson has its photo enhance mode. Canon has a "colour correction" mode.

5. Both can print CDs.

6. Canon has 9600x2400 dpi whereas Epson has 5760x1440 only.
(My current R210 only has 2880x1440 and it prints stunning photos already)

7. Canon can print multiple pages per page as well as double sided. Epson
cannot.

8. My scanner is an Epson Perfection V100. It works very well with the Epson
R210. Not sure about the canon.

Anyway, I am comparing the Epson R270/290 against the Canon IP46xx/IP45xx
series. Any views on this is appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Canon
 
Ad

Advertisements

M

measekite

Over the last year I have changed from an Epson 830 to a Canon 4500.
My findings are that I never have clogged heads now.
I also find the Canon photo printing software to be excellent and very
easy to use.
I can change the printhead on my Canon if I need to.
Borderless photo prints are really stunning from the Canon.
The major advantage seems to be that the Epson would spend
loads of time and ink in cleaning the printhead.
Canon do not seem to need to do this.

Just in case you might think I am ***measekite*** I am pleased to
confirm I use non OEM inks in my Canon as I did in my
previous Epson.

You can tell how full of crap this answer is. The poster reports that the
results for the Canon are stunning when compared with his Epson but he
neither uses Canon nor Epson ink. The same crap ink would produce about
the same crap results in either printer so it really does not make much
difference which is chosen under those circumstances.
 
M

measekite

On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 02:28:45 -0800, Arthur Entlich wrote:

Now he top posts his advertisements.
 
I

IntergalacticExpandingPanda

On Dec 14, 9:28 am, "RSKT"
The IP4500 is not longer available, so I'm wondering if the 4680 is an
improvement over the 4500 or merely a lower cost version with some
tradeoffs.
Any "canoners" can comment?

Thanks all! :)

I've not seen the output, but you can request it from
http://www.yourprint.canon-europe.com/
or for states users
http://www.trymyphoto.com/

The ip4600 is a down grade in head size, and inktank size with no
improvement in efficiency. It might kick off a 4x6 faster at least
according to the docs. But given it requires more strokes per page,
to be the same speed I'll make more noise, 10db according to them.
It'll cost you more per page. I've only heard they made an
improvement to the black, but I've not seen it. They also have
separate chips for Europe, US, and Asia, which will be no doubt
problematic for American users trying to enable CD printing.

The price you are seeing for the ip4500 doesn't reflect manufacturing
costs AFAIK, but rather the fact that Canon wants these new printers
out the door as fast as possible. I presume since the old chips were
cracked they want uncracked chips on the market ASAP.

In terms of head size, it's on par with the ip5000/ip4200. These
printers are nothing to sneeze at.
 
R

RSKT

Thanks Dan. I am not based in the US, so those "offers" actually mean
cost+$$postage.
But no wonder the ink cartridges seem to be cheaper. I see they make it
cheaper and then make you buy more in the long run. But if the new head is
similar or better, I guess I can still disregard the ink cost because most
important to me is it prints excellent photos. I don't print alot in normal
use anyway.
 
Ad

Advertisements

R

RSKT

Thanks IntergalacticExpandingPanda.
The IP4680 is selling here (with rebate) for the equivalent of US$99.
If its slightly slower than the 4500, I think I can live with that if it has
the same quality.

And now that you guys have got me thinking, I always wondered why Epson kept
on having different ink cartridges for all their models. It got so bad it
needed a full size rack of ink cartridges just to cover the entire range
when I went to buy some. I realise now its just to keep ahead of the
pirates...:) but it does make it very inconvenient for legitimate users too
because when you upgrade your printer, you can't use your old cartridges.

I would like to summarise what I have gathered so far :

Epson wins on colour rendition and image quality while Canon scores on
features (duplex, etc). While the 4680 has only 3 colour cartridges, it may
cost more than the 5 colour cartridges on the Epson because of capacity.

Cheers :)




"IntergalacticExpandingPanda" <[email protected]>
wrote in message

I've not seen the output, but you can request it from
http://www.yourprint.canon-europe.com/
or for states users
http://www.trymyphoto.com/

The ip4600 is a down grade in head size, and inktank size with no
improvement in efficiency. It might kick off a 4x6 faster at least
according to the docs. But given it requires more strokes per page,
to be the same speed I'll make more noise, 10db according to them.
It'll cost you more per page. I've only heard they made an
improvement to the black, but I've not seen it. They also have
separate chips for Europe, US, and Asia, which will be no doubt
problematic for American users trying to enable CD printing.

The price you are seeing for the ip4500 doesn't reflect manufacturing
costs AFAIK, but rather the fact that Canon wants these new printers
out the door as fast as possible. I presume since the old chips were
cracked they want uncracked chips on the market ASAP.

In terms of head size, it's on par with the ip5000/ip4200. These
printers are nothing to sneeze at.
 
Ad

Advertisements


Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top