Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Long Day's Journey Into Printers . . .

Reply
Thread Tools

Long Day's Journey Into Printers . . .

 
 
PTRAVEL
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-03-2003
As I continue my odyssey to a wide-carriage high-quality printer, I've
stumbled across the Canon I9100. I haven't seen the output of it yet, but a
Canon rep told me it's identical to the I950. I've seen the output of that
and was very impressed -- smooth, subtle tonal variation and no bronzing at
all on glossy paper. With the naked eye, I couldn't tell the difference
between the output of this printer and a photographic print. It also looked
better than the S9000. I'm off to New York, shortly, so I hope to be able
to seen an I9100 in the flesh (J&R and B&H both have them). If it's as good
as the I950 print out, I think that's the one I'll be getting.

Has anyone had any experience with this printer?


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bob O`Bob
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-03-2003
PTRAVEL wrote:
>
> As I continue my odyssey to a wide-carriage high-quality printer, I've
> stumbled across the Canon I9100. I haven't seen the output of it yet, but a
> Canon rep told me it's identical to the I950. I've seen the output of that
> and was very impressed -- smooth, subtle tonal variation and no bronzing at
> all on glossy paper. With the naked eye, I couldn't tell the difference
> between the output of this printer and a photographic print. It also looked
> better than the S9000. I'm off to New York, shortly, so I hope to be able
> to seen an I9100 in the flesh (J&R and B&H both have them). If it's as good
> as the I950 print out, I think that's the one I'll be getting.
>
> Has anyone had any experience with this printer?



I like Canon. I recently bought one.

But if a "Canon rep" actually personally lied to me like that, I very
much
doubt I'd be buying another Canon for a long time. All one has to do is
check the specs (e.g. minimum droplet volume) on their own web site
to see that "identical" is an unsupportable assertion.

And if it wasn't really a "Canon rep" then that would be one store I'd
be
unlikely to purchase anything from for quite some time, instead.

It's easy to believe the i9100 produces better prints than the much
older
S9000, but almost impossible to belive it's quite as good as the i950.
If it was actually the same, you can bet it would be called "i9500"
instead.



Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
PTRAVEL
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-03-2003

"Bob O`Bob" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> PTRAVEL wrote:
> >
> > As I continue my odyssey to a wide-carriage high-quality printer, I've
> > stumbled across the Canon I9100. I haven't seen the output of it yet,

but a
> > Canon rep told me it's identical to the I950. I've seen the output of

that
> > and was very impressed -- smooth, subtle tonal variation and no bronzing

at
> > all on glossy paper. With the naked eye, I couldn't tell the difference
> > between the output of this printer and a photographic print. It also

looked
> > better than the S9000. I'm off to New York, shortly, so I hope to be

able
> > to seen an I9100 in the flesh (J&R and B&H both have them). If it's as

good
> > as the I950 print out, I think that's the one I'll be getting.
> >
> > Has anyone had any experience with this printer?

>
>
> I like Canon. I recently bought one.
>
> But if a "Canon rep" actually personally lied to me like that, I very
> much
> doubt I'd be buying another Canon for a long time. All one has to do is
> check the specs (e.g. minimum droplet volume) on their own web site
> to see that "identical" is an unsupportable assertion.


I can't find the specs on Canon's website, at least not for droplet volume.
However, I did find this at
http://www.digitalmediadesigner.com/...non2030227.htm :
------------------------------------------
On the printer front, Canon has introduced a new portable inkjet, two new
BubbleJet Direct models and two photo printers. The new BubbleJets include
the i450 Color Bubble Jet and i470D Photo Printer. Both offer 4,800 x 1,200
DPI resolution and combined 5 picoliter and 2 picoliter ink drops. Both also
support direct printing via USB, and the i470D also includes a memory card
reader. The models support paper sizes up to 8.5" x 11" and will run
standalone or attached to systems running Mac OS 9, Mac OS X or Windows. The
i450 will sell for $99.99; The i470D will sell for $149.99. Both will be
available in April.

New photo printers include the i950 and i9100. The i9100 replaces the S9000
in Canon's high-end lineup. It offers borderless printing up to 13" x 19" at
a resolution of 4,800 x 1,200 DPI. Few details of the i950 were available at
press time, though Canon says it uses six individual ink tanks and offers
3,072 nozzles, all outputting 2 picoliter ink droplets.
----------------------------------------
According to the article, which quotes Canon, both the i950 and th i9100
output 2 picoliter droplets. But then I found this:

"There is a difference between the 9100 and the 950... The 9100 really isn't
a wide carraige 950. The 9100 only prints in 4 pico-liter drops where the
950 uses 2 picoliter drops. The 2 picoliter drops really seems to help the
950 create superb prints. The 9100 does go up to 4800 vertical dpi though.
Can't remember the horizontal dpi at the moment...

I think I'll wait for the "i9500" with 2 picoliter drops... "


I've found this confirmed at other sites.

>
> It's easy to believe the i9100 produces better prints than the much
> older
> S9000, but almost impossible to belive it's quite as good as the i950.


From what I've read, the i9100 eliminates slight banding that was visible
with S9000 output.

> If it was actually the same, you can bet it would be called "i9500"
> instead.


I wonder why Canon didn't simply make a wide-carriage 950 and do exactly
that.

>And if it wasn't really a "Canon rep" then that would be one store I'd

be
>unlikely to purchase anything from for quite some time, instead.


It was a Canon rep -- at least he had a "Canon" shirt on. There was also an
Epson rep there.


>
>
>
> Bob



 
Reply With Quote
 
Greg Townsend
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-03-2003
On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 18:08:05 -0700, Bob O`Bob <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>PTRAVEL wrote:
>>
>> As I continue my odyssey to a wide-carriage high-quality printer, I've
>> stumbled across the Canon I9100. I haven't seen the output of it yet, but a
>> Canon rep told me it's identical to the I950. I've seen the output of that
>> and was very impressed -- smooth, subtle tonal variation and no bronzing at
>> all on glossy paper. With the naked eye, I couldn't tell the difference
>> between the output of this printer and a photographic print. It also looked
>> better than the S9000. I'm off to New York, shortly, so I hope to be able
>> to seen an I9100 in the flesh (J&R and B&H both have them). If it's as good
>> as the I950 print out, I think that's the one I'll be getting.
>>
>> Has anyone had any experience with this printer?

>
>
>I like Canon. I recently bought one.
>
>But if a "Canon rep" actually personally lied to me like that, I very
>much
>doubt I'd be buying another Canon for a long time. All one has to do is
>check the specs (e.g. minimum droplet volume) on their own web site
>to see that "identical" is an unsupportable assertion.
>
>And if it wasn't really a "Canon rep" then that would be one store I'd
>be
>unlikely to purchase anything from for quite some time, instead.
>
>It's easy to believe the i9100 produces better prints than the much
>older
>S9000, but almost impossible to belive it's quite as good as the i950.
>If it was actually the same, you can bet it would be called "i9500"
>instead.
>
>
>
> Bob




Here in NZ its EPSON EPSON & EPSON as they can print archival prints plus the
heads do not ware out like the Canon ones..

Problem with Bubble jets is that the Ink corrodes the heater elements.


 
Reply With Quote
 
PTRAVEL
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-03-2003

"Greg Townsend" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 18:08:05 -0700, Bob O`Bob <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
> >PTRAVEL wrote:
> >>
> >> As I continue my odyssey to a wide-carriage high-quality printer, I've
> >> stumbled across the Canon I9100. I haven't seen the output of it yet,

but a
> >> Canon rep told me it's identical to the I950. I've seen the output of

that
> >> and was very impressed -- smooth, subtle tonal variation and no

bronzing at
> >> all on glossy paper. With the naked eye, I couldn't tell the

difference
> >> between the output of this printer and a photographic print. It also

looked
> >> better than the S9000. I'm off to New York, shortly, so I hope to be

able
> >> to seen an I9100 in the flesh (J&R and B&H both have them). If it's as

good
> >> as the I950 print out, I think that's the one I'll be getting.
> >>
> >> Has anyone had any experience with this printer?

> >
> >
> >I like Canon. I recently bought one.
> >
> >But if a "Canon rep" actually personally lied to me like that, I very
> >much
> >doubt I'd be buying another Canon for a long time. All one has to do is
> >check the specs (e.g. minimum droplet volume) on their own web site
> >to see that "identical" is an unsupportable assertion.
> >
> >And if it wasn't really a "Canon rep" then that would be one store I'd
> >be
> >unlikely to purchase anything from for quite some time, instead.
> >
> >It's easy to believe the i9100 produces better prints than the much
> >older
> >S9000, but almost impossible to belive it's quite as good as the i950.
> >If it was actually the same, you can bet it would be called "i9500"
> >instead.
> >
> >
> >
> > Bob

>
>
>
> Here in NZ its EPSON EPSON & EPSON as they can print archival prints plus

the
> heads do not ware out like the Canon ones..


I suspect that's why Canon has replaceable heads. I can see why
professionals would be concerned with archival quality, but as someone who
does photography just for the fun of it, it doesn't really matter to me.
Print quality, on the other hand, is of paramount concern, which brings me
back full-circle. Since the i9100 doesn't duplicate the quality of the i950
(or does it?), I'm back to looking at the two Epsons (2200 and 1280).

>
> Problem with Bubble jets is that the Ink corrodes the heater elements.
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Jon Noble
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-03-2003
The i9100 has the same specs as the i950. 4800x2400 dpi. Go for the i9100, I
did (waited an extra 4 months for it to start shipping). If you like, send
me your home address and I'll send you a 4x6; I think you'll agree it's the
equal of the i950).

And Canon's heads don't burn out any sooner than Epson heads; however, Epson
heads DO clog constantly. That's why I replaced an otherwise perfectly good
Epson 780 with the Canon i9100. (And of course, if an Epson head burns out,
you can't replace it yourself.)

-Jon
(Don't use my reply address, it's for spammers. My email is
jon.nobleATcomcastDOTnet)


"PTRAVEL" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bgidl5$of2gl$(E-Mail Removed)-berlin.de...
> I suspect that's why Canon has replaceable heads. I can see why
> professionals would be concerned with archival quality, but as someone who
> does photography just for the fun of it, it doesn't really matter to me.
> Print quality, on the other hand, is of paramount concern, which brings me
> back full-circle. Since the i9100 doesn't duplicate the quality of the

i950
> (or does it?), I'm back to looking at the two Epsons (2200 and 1280).



 
Reply With Quote
 
Mick Ruthven
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-03-2003
I keep reading that the droplet size of the i950 is half the size (2 pl)
then the i9100 (4pl). What about that difference?

"Jon Noble" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Tv9Xa.54890$Ho3.8083@sccrnsc03...
> The i9100 has the same specs as the i950. 4800x2400 dpi. Go for the i9100,

I
> did (waited an extra 4 months for it to start shipping). If you like, send
> me your home address and I'll send you a 4x6; I think you'll agree it's

the
> equal of the i950).
>
> And Canon's heads don't burn out any sooner than Epson heads; however,

Epson
> heads DO clog constantly. That's why I replaced an otherwise perfectly

good
> Epson 780 with the Canon i9100. (And of course, if an Epson head burns

out,
> you can't replace it yourself.)
>
> -Jon
> (Don't use my reply address, it's for spammers. My email is
> jon.nobleATcomcastDOTnet)



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Having compilation error: no match for call to (const __gnu_cxx::hash<long long int>) (const long long int&) veryhotsausage C++ 1 07-04-2008 05:41 PM
A long journey to VOIP Lena VOIP 2 06-03-2006 10:56 PM
DVD Verdict reviews: STAR WARS: A MUSICAL JOURNEY, ED, EDD 'N' EDDY: SEASON 1, VOLUME 1, and more! DVD Verdict DVD Video 0 05-19-2005 08:11 AM
Bruce Lee: Warrior's Journey Wade365 DVD Video 0 10-27-2003 10:06 PM
Canon 10D: The Journey To Focus Freedom Bob Pattinson Digital Photography 1 10-26-2003 06:05 AM



Advertisments