Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26

Thread: Canon i9900 vs Epson 2200

  1. #1

    Canon i9900 vs Epson 2200

    Hi every one,

    I recently saw a Canon i9900 printer and I wonder what you think of it compared with the Epson 2200 in terms of print quality, resolution, droplet size, all other technical aspect and of course value for the $$$?

    Thanks in advance. Yves

  2. #2

    Canon i9900 vs Epson 2200

    The best place to ask this question is probably www.dpreview.com. There are lots of threads in the forums there on each of these printers, and even some comparing these printers. Having said that, here are my thoughts...

    I don't own either printer, but I've seen prints from both and I've talked to people who use them. My take on this is that the Canon beats the Epson hands down on speed, the print quality on the Canon is ever-so-slightly better (but you're into an area of diminishing returns here, as the Epson produces fantastic prints so there's no place to make a radical improvement in image quality). For the technical specifications (droplet size, resolution, etc.) you can check the Canon and Epson web sites.

    Print longevity on the Canon is questionable at best. If the prints aren't framed, expect color shifts in a matter or months (or even weeks if you're unlucky).

    If you're planning on framing everything, the Canon's probably a better printer just based on the speed. If you're planning on displaying pictures unframed, or if you're planning to sell prints, the Epson's probably the better choice.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    9,487

    Canon i9900 vs Epson 2200

    DP Review is a great website for digital imaging news, and the author's reviews are the best in the business, but the forums are a mess of gibbering, ignorant folks arguing over petty details or absurd points. I'd welcome a good discussion of the merits of the Canon versus the Epson HERE, from intelligent photographers I respect!

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    4

    Canon i9900 vs Epson 2200

    I am using Canon i9100 and when i decide to choose between this and Epson 2200, the cost is a major factor. At that time, Canon is nearly 45% of an Epson and to myself, I won't like to afford a nearly USD800 Epson 2200. However, i regret to my decision when I compare the same A4 size printout with my old Epson Photo Stylus 750 . The printing output , e.g. details and colour, is not too satisfactory. When i think again, it seems Canon does not have any flatship large format printer for commercial use whereas Epson already has so many large printer. If feasible, I will suggest you to test print a sample file to two printers in their showroom before you made the decision. Unlike Epson, Canon photo grade inkjet large size glossy paper is expensive and rare to find as well.

  5. #5

    Canon i9900 vs Epson 2200

    The main reason I ask here instead of DPReview is because I appreciate the member experience, intelligence and clear opinion on many matters about photography.

    Thanks to all.

  6. #6

    Canon i9900 vs Epson 2200

    My intent with mentioning dpreview was not to infer that this was an improper question for this board; rather, it was to steer Yves to a place where a significant number of people with experience with these printers gather. My apologies for having phrased my comments in a way that inferred otherwise.





    Also, Frank, you're right that there's a log of "pixel peeping" going on over at dpreview (and a lot of "My printer can beat up your printer" posts). It takes a lot more digging than at a site like this.





    Having said all of that, I'd like to point out to Yves that it's going to be hard to find someone who has significant experience with both of these printers. Given the cost of each, I'd think it would be rare for someone to invest the money in both. The two printers do have some obvious advantages and disadvantages.



    The advantages for the Canon:<ul><li>Greater color gamut<li>Higher resolution (4800x2400 vs. 2880x1440)<li>Handles glossy paper better (the Epson is very prone to bronzing with glossy papers, and the effect is pretty ugly in prints I've examined)<li>2 picoliter drop size versus 4 picoliter drops on the Epson<li>Cost (US$499 vs. $699 for the Epson)</ul>



    The advantages for the Epson:<ul><li>More flexible paper handling (including a straight-through paper path for thicker papers)<li>More 3rd party support<li>Archival prints</ul>



    The last point is the kicker for a lot of people. Many feel that a print that's sold should last a long time. The Epson prints should outlast anything that's currently available in the digital world. If you intend to sell your prints, you have to figure out if this is an important factor. If you're going to hang your prints on your wall, you can always print another copy in a few years with whatever technology is available.





    I personally own four printers. The two I use primarily are the Epson 2000P (the predecessor to the 2200) and an HP 7960 (for black and white). If I was buying today, I'd pony up the extra money for the Epson because of the archival qualities.I don't sell my digital work, but I often make gifts of prints. I don't mind that the Epson prefers matte paper. I print all of my color work on Epson Archival Matte.





    Either of these printers will produce outstanding prints. What you plan to do with the prints is an important factor in deciding between them.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    9,487

    Canon i9900 vs Epson 2200

    Sorry for sounding harsh Dave, not my intent.

    I too would favor the Epson 2200 over the Canon because of archival reasons. But I'm curious about your HP 7960 - how has that worked out for you? I haven't found any decent reviews or experienced user comments about that printer either... The HP site is worthless.

    I am am the cusp of buying a 2200 and I do a lot of B&W. I really hate the notion of spending another huge hunk of money for a software RIP - I've bought several RIPS in the past and they all have been trouble.

  8. #8
    Ted Harris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    3,465

    Canon i9900 vs Epson 2200

    I'll throw one mor eprinter into the soup, the Epson R800. I just got one and have been using it for about 10 days now. I can't compare it to anyhing exceot the 2200, the Epson 4000 an dhigher end Epson printers and Fuji Pictography printers. My initial impression is that it matches the output of all of the mentioned 'higher end' printers. I've spent the past week reprinting 6x6, 6x9 and 4x5 chromes, color and B&W negatives that have been printed before on Epson 7600/9600 and Fuji machines to compare the output.



    here is a learning curve as with any new piece of equipment and I am no tthrough with that curve by any means but I am well satisfied with most of the output I am getting. In two instance I have produced prints that come very close to the LightJet output from my lab. In on einstance where I could jsut never get the lab to get it right I have the print I have been looking for.



    Yes, yes, the size is limited to 8.5 x 11 sheets or 8.3 inch rolls. Doesn't bother me. I thought and thought and realized that over many years I have probably printed and sold more 8x10 and smaller prints than larger prints. larger color prints still go to the lab and larger B&W are still done wet for the moment but I suspect there may be an Epson 4000 in my future (gotta solve my scanner issues first).



    If you can live with the size don't overlook this printer.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    640

    Canon i9900 vs Epson 2200

    Besides the reasons above, another fairly compelling reason to buy the Epson is because of its larger brethren. If you really like your print but wish a larger one then 13x19 (or want higher production), you can send out your files to one of the many services that use a 7600 (or other larger format Epson) and get essentially identical results. This is -- IMO -- a pretty big boon, sort of being able to stay in the same process.

  10. #10

    Canon i9900 vs Epson 2200

    Frank-

    (Sorry if I was overly-sensitive about your comment above. I'll request that you take it as a sign of the drugs I'm currently taking for back problems...re-reading your post I see that you weren't in any way negative about what I'd written.)

    The HP 7960 gets dinged a lot on the web for "pizza wheel" marks on the prints. (We've probably all seen those comments made about other printers over the years as well.) I think either I got lucky or the problem has been exaggerated, as my 7960 doesn't exhibit those marks under any circumstances I've run into. This includes both HP and Epson papers, printing both color and B&W.

    I found the printer easy to set up and work with, and it produces the best B&W prints I've ever made. There are (as always) some caveats:

    The paper path is a U-turn, so the thickest media you can use is the HP Premium Plus paper (which is a fairly thick paper as these things go). No chance of sending any sort of thicker media through this one, and certainly no chance of using any sort of stiff media.

    The prints emerge from the printer with a decided brown cast. The cast settles quite a bit in about an hour and is gone in a day, leaving a truly neutral print. (Truly neutral in the sense that they look neutral under every lighting situation under which I've examined them.) This isn't so much a disadvantage as a warning about the surprise you get the first time you print B&W with the printer. I spent ten minutes reassuring myself that I'd not accidentally printed with all of the colors rather than just the Photo Gray cartridge.

    The printer can handle any of the HP papers, as well as Epson ColorLife, very well. It's awful with Epson Archival Matte. I have some other papers laying around, but haven't had time to test them yet.

    The HP cartridges are expensive for the amount of ink that you get because they have an integrated head. The advantage to this system is that you can replace the head by replacing the cartridge should something go wrong, as compared to buying a new head for a Canon or sending an Epson in to have someone else replace the head. The ink cartridges cost about the same as other brands, but they don't last quite as long.

    And finally, the biggest disadvantage: It only prints up to 8 1/2 x 11. If it was a 13x19 printer, I'd seriously think about retiring the Epson 2000P.

    Color prints and B&W prints from the HP are stunning on the HP glossy and matte (more of a pearl finish) papers, and on Epson ColorLife. It's faster than the Epson 2000P sitting on the other side of my desk (which isn't saying much as the 2000P is a slow printer) and faster than my Epson 785EPX. It's been much easier for me to achieve great results with the HP.

    I've gotten better B&W results from the HP than I did when I tried out Quadtone inks on an Epson printer. Deeper blacks and a better tonal range, which surprised me as the HP uses three shades of gray as opposed to the four tanks in the Epson Quadtone set I tried.

    Unfortunately, neither the HP 7660 or 7760 use HP's PhotoRet Pro. If they did, then one of those printers with the HP PhotoGray cartridge would achieve the same results without the expense of a card reader. (Two of my printers have card readers and I've never used them.) When I bought the 7960 I looked at the other HP's and decided to go with this one to get their best software; the results I'm getting give me comfort that I made the right decision.

    I have a number of prints hanging on my office walls without any protection as a casual test of the archival qualities of the HP printer. There are flourescent lights on in the office all day, and a couple of the prints are directly above an HP LaserJet 4 (a notorious ozone producer). So far the prints look like the day I printed them, so I'm starting to believe that HP prints under glass will last longer than I will. (I've done the same thing with prints from the two Epsons: 2000P prints don't shift, but 785EPX prints start to shift in a matter of weeks in the same circumstances.)

    Good luck with your decision.

    Dave

Similar Threads

  1. Zapping an Epson 2200
    By Frank Petronio in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 19-May-2006, 07:48
  2. Epson 2200 to 4800 - practicle for hobbiest?
    By Hugh Sakols in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 16-Apr-2006, 14:55
  3. inkjet recommendation (EpsonR1800 vs Canon i9900)?
    By Daniel Geiger in forum Business
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 7-Sep-2005, 06:39
  4. How do you do borderless prints on a 2100/2200?
    By Yaakov Asher Sinclair in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 21-Mar-2005, 13:50
  5. Epson 2200 and Hahnemuhle paper
    By Steve Rosen in forum Business
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 22-Feb-2004, 01:52

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •