I think this is a tough question. I've printed recently on a Canon IP5000, which is not a particularly special "photo" printer, but was cheap at a time when I needed something quick to replace an aging Epson stylus printer. It uses the E series Canon dye inks, and for the money, does an excellent job. The Canon printer is more robustly built that the Epson too. My take on image life with these inks on high retention papers like Kodak Ultima leads me to believe image life will be about the same as (or maybe slightly better than) the equivalent photographic image (I'm talking colour here). So far, the Canon prints on Ultima seem quite durable.

Enter the Epson R2400. I watched Canon closely on their new pigment printer, as it came up in direct competition to my planned purchase of the R2400 (I believe the R2400 uses the same head engine as the larger commercials ???). Thus far, I have been unable to find out squat about the new Canon pigment printer, although I believe there's a local dealer show coming up where the hardware will be evident. So far my dealer can't even give me a price. Now, my dealer put the R2400 on a bit of a sale this past week, and the fumbling of Canon was enough to cause me to spring for it. Besides the minor sale, I rationalized that even if the Canon printer turned up next week, it'll likley be 2 years before it settles down - this is their first consumer pigment printer. Took Epson 3 tries to stabilize pigment printing, although Canon has the advantage now of Epson's learning curve. My take is that the new Canon will take a while to "be all it can be" and with any significant aftermarket support, something that's already there with the Epson.

BUT. The R2400 is now home, and my initial observation is I'm paying a premium for pigment inks. It suffers from the same structurally flimsy construction that seems to be typical of their consumer lines ( I can only guess the commercial machines are more sturdily built.). The drivers wouldn't install (I have to run 98SE to support a firewire film scanner that I have that XP was supposed to, but didn't work properly with.), and Epson US/CAN doesn't support 98 (presumably because Bill stopped supporting it). I had to rummage around the Epson EU site to get drivers to install in 98. Print capability *just* equals the cheap Canon as far as resolution is concerned. I'm attributing this to the difference between pigment and dyes; the Canon does produce a slightly sharper image although there is no discernible difference in "information" printed if you look at it closely. The Canon does have a smaller drop size.

All of which is a long way around about saying that the new Canon *might* have significant promise, but maybe not in a reasonably short time frame. If you can expense out your printer needs now, it may make sense to go with the Epson and IF the Canons meet the need, roll out the Epson in a year or two. The aftermarket should remain strong for the Epson if its kept in good condition. If you can cruise comfortably on what you have for the next 6 months you might be best to wait. That all said, I would guess Canon's versions of commercial pigment printers could be further off as a stable platform - they have more to lose if commercial machines are troublesome, assuming they have any interest in that market at all.

Personally, I think the newer Canon machines are physically better boxes, and I believe their drivers are superior tho not as versatile. But they ignored the B/W pigment market and now they have to catch up. If they're serious though I think they'll eventually run away from Epson, at least in colour, but I'm not getting any younger and didn't want to wait another couple of years for things to settle down! Sorry for the long ramble...