Canon i9900 vs Epson 2200

[Yves Gauvreau]

Thank you all for your replies and I hope I didn't offend anyone with my previous reply about DPReview. I hate to loose my time and here I always get quality answers. My mind is made-up I wanted to know if the Canon prints would last amoung other things since I want to ("I'll try") sell my work when I'm setup properly and I want to be able to make larger prints if needed.Many thanks to allYves

[Frank Petronio]

Thanks Dave. I am still leaning towards the 2200 myself, as I like Archival Matte color prints. And I think - without any RIP or sheenaigans - it will make a decent warm or cold toned monochrome print so long as you don't expect it to hit a perfect grey neutral.

[Yves Gauvreau]

Frank wrote earlier the acronym RIP. I saw this before but could someone tell me what it is and what it means?

Thanks. Yves

[Dave Moeller]

Yves-

RIP stands for "Raster Image Processor". Think of it as a printing method that bypasses the printing engine in the software you're using (i.e., PhotoShop), the printer driver included in your operating system, and the printer profiles that are on your system, all in favor of software that's specifically tuned for your printer, ink, and paper combination (and DPI setting, and a bunch of other possible stuff).

Take a look at http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsights/pi015/pi015.html for a review of ColorByte ImagePrint; this review should make it pretty clear to you what a RIP can do. You might also look around the rest of that site, as there's a lot of good information there on digital tools that are specific to, or touch on, digital printing.

Dave

[Paul_4426]

Hello. I am new here and also am looking at the Epson 2200 and Canon's i9900. I have no experience with Canon printers but have about 8 years experience with various Epson models. Epsons print very nice images and their supplies are easy to find. On the downside, they clog quite often and there is a lot of ink waste. Banding and paper jams are also frequent problems.

I went to Amazon.com and found buyer reviews for both printers. Of course there were many more for the 2200, as it's been out for two years. The i9900 has only been out four months I think. Anyway, there were many complaints about the Epson, the most common being that "bronzing" effect, which makes the prints look ugly when viewed at even a slight angle. There were also complaints about paper jams, banding, and lack of support. Of course, there were many laudatory comments as well.

The i9900 had 16 reviews, with only one being bad. This person's complaints were the CD was defective upon arrival and there was no printer cable included in the box. The remaining reviews were all four or five stars (five being the best).

I also checked dpreview and the guy who runs it (can't remember his name) said in a thread about these two printers that he has prints from the Canon i9000 hanging on his wall in the Florida sun and has noticed no fading after a year. I'm trying to find the thread again but no luck so far.

I still haven't decided but, based on what I've found so far, I'm leaning towards the Canon. I want my prints to last also, but I don't want ugly prints, either.

[Paul_4426]

Okay, I goofed. The reason I couldn't find the thread I mention above is because it wasn't from dpreview. It was from Steve's Digicams, and it was Steve who has the prints from the i9100 on his wall. Here's a link to that thread:

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/view_topic.php?id=26115&forum_id=56

[Matt_4499]

I have owned both the 2200 and the i9900 (or rather, the i9950 as it is called outside the US). The 2200 is bulky, akward to use and very expensive both to purchase and to operate. The i9900 performs magnificently right out of the box, is much much faster and prints look much better. I can't comment on the respective archival quality of the prints, as I haven't used either printer long enough. But the Epson prints show very disturbing metamerism, while the Canon's prints are superb. If you compare prints from the two printers on glossy paper, the Canon wins hands down. B&W is not satisfactory with both printers, as there is a significant colour cast. I am sure that for "serious" photographers, the Epson may offer advantages, but for average users, it is an awkward, expensive and slow thing to use. The Canon has much better software, is easier to operate and the speed makes all the difference. Most importantly, it doesn't use microchips on the inkjet cartridges, which makes it much more robust. After a mere 6 months, the Epson refused to recognize genuine Epson cartridges, and I was stuck. I've thrown away (yes!) the Epson and am happily using the Canon. There's no looking back.

[Paul_4426]

Thanks for that info, Matt. I'm convinced now to the get Canon. The only thing holding me back now are new rumors of Epson coming out with a replacement for the 2200...supposedly incorporating the improvements in the R800 into a large format printer. I want archival prints, glossy prints, and large prints. I want it all!!!! So far, my research indicates:

1: The 2200 will give you archive and large but not glossy. 2: The i9900 will give you glossy and large, but not archival. 3: The R800 will give you glossy and archival, but not large.

Jeeze, does it ever end?

BTW: I read that color cast problem can be caused by using two print profiles at once: your print program's and the printer's. They say the best thing to do is disable the printer's profile and use your print program's. Another possible problem is the green channel of the file. A slight adjustment of that channel using Photoshop's Curve function can fix it. (Or so I've read.)

[Ted Sapphire]

I just purchased a Mac G5. Now I am trying to figure out which printer to get without going too nuts in the process. I see I have some company. Thank you all for the spirited discussion. I am leaning towards the Canbon i9100, or i9900. Paul, like every good American, I want it all too. It's come down to that I suppose. I don't want complicated heads that clog up, and controls I need to put on a lab coat to master. I'm just a guy who paints, & photographs.

In my search I noted that Printers are pitched to businesses and to peopole with a digital cameras. I never hear about great printers for visual artists...have you? Why not? I want to print my transparencies, and other photos. I also want to print my other imagry. I have been experimenting with programs like Painter, and PhotoShop, to create computer generator based art. I save them as high-resolution files. I would like to find a professional computer capable of printing these type of files on 'art' paper, like a Fabriano, or some other etching paper. Can I do that with a Canon?

I vote for everyone putting the screws on Canon to fill their 'Think Tanks' with archival inks. That is a major issue for myself and other artists who would like to sell work. It is fascinating how these companies are willing to keep tweaking their products in hopes of outdoing the other guy, ( what's so new really?) I feel the dust has yet to settle in the printer development dept. If Canon keeps hearing that they look so good next to Epson,... speed, quality, ease of use,...Except for Archival Inks....Don't let it go to their heads.... Insist that they just have to come up with long lasting economical inks if they want to continue eating into Epson's share of the market. In order to afford to get going I will forgo super sizing it till it is warranted. Instead of buying a large format printer now that costs a bundle, I could farm those high-resolution folders out to RIP studios for clients who want larger works. Of course selling a few pieces would be an auspicious sign. www.tedsapphire.com Comments, Suggestions, Input much appreciated! - Ted

[Kirk Gittings]

At the view camera conference George deWolfe said "it is not a question which printer to buy but which Epson printer to buy". He has no ties to Epson. I have been waiting for a 4000 to be available. In the meantime I was considering a 2200 but....My sources who do consulting for Epson say that the 2200 will be discontinued relatively soon (that is why there are rebates available-a sure sign!) and replaced with a model that has more and larger quantity inks and a final clear "coating" inker or something, which will increase archivability. I would rate this info as slightly better than a rumour.