Epson R800 or Canon Pixma

J@son Ch'ng · 21st April 2005

I'm looking to acquire a fast good quality, low print cost 4R and A4 printer. Can any R800 owner and i5000 or i8000 user share their experience and recommendation please?

Many thanks

sooming · 21st April 2005

Hi Jason,

I'm using the Canon Pixma IP5000, quite an acceptable quality at 4R and up to A4, but the Epson R800 is a different league altogether. It's more comparable to the Pixma IP8500, and with the additional (individual ink catridge) for R-G-B, the colours on the Epson will be better.

metalgear · 21st April 2005

What I did was to take a CF card with a high-res favourite pix down to the Canon, HP and Epson showrooms at funan for sample prints across their printer range. These guys don't sell, so they are there to extoll the virtues of the different models and technologies.

You ought to do this at A4 size as 4R size is hard to see details. Better if you are familiar with the original setting/lighting as the subtle colour casts become very obvious when you put them head-to-head.

In the end its personal choice. I found that the mid range printers produced nice contrasty shots with "punchy" consumer appeal, while the higher end products tends to be more "mellow" - but closer to the real thing.

Keep your shots for a week and wait for the ink/gloss to settle and make your conclusions.

I didn't do any drastic testing but it was clear to me at the end that the Epson R800 was a clear winner being very neutral and even - difficult high colour and contrast shots were evenly dealt with.

The Canon has a colour casts by model - and the colour signature differs greatly from model to model - you have to see it to believe it. I found this a little unnerving.

The HP - really nice prints too, except that ink is really going to get expensive about +30% above Canon/Epson overall. I didn't do a B&W test, but believe that specific grey inks make it their strength.

What's peculiar about the R800 is its pigment ink - it costs about $21 per ink tank about 16% more than their average ink. But a special gloss optimizer provides a "commercial-print" finish, especially when used on matte paper. On paper, I found it works well too on Ilford and HP papers, which may be cheaper but of comparable (or even better) quality than the Epson.

tunster · 21st April 2005

Practically Epson gives you better photo quality. But Epson likes to built-in their print heads unlike Canon. Canon separate their print head from the printer and ink tank for easier and cheaper maintenance fee. So, it is still up to you to decide.

Watcher · 21st April 2005

The R800 is using pigment inks that last a very long time, even on standard glossy paper. I've posted links in the printer forum regarding the longevity. Another user who had bought his iP8500 or iP6000 ended up with fading prints (his own words) and became a white elephant.

Edit: The post by kuoann of his experience with iP8500 is here

tao · 21st April 2005

image quality wise, you can't go wrong with Epson, it is really better and you get waterproof and longlasting prints when using Durabrite papers.

I noticed that all fineart photographers who do their own inkjet prints go for Epson.

Watcher · 21st April 2005

Originally Posted by tao

image quality wise, you can't go wrong with Epson, it is really better and you get waterproof and longlasting prints when using Durabrite papers.

I noticed that all fineart photographers who do their own inkjet prints go for Epson.

Minor correction: R800 don't need Durabrite papers. Standard Epson and third-party papers accepted.

tao · 21st April 2005

Originally Posted by Watcher

Minor correction: R800 don't need Durabrite papers. Standard Epson and third-party papers accepted.
__________________
It is better to keep quiet, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth, and remove all doubt.

pls read my post more carefully... you do need durabrite papers if you want the print to be waterproof and lasts 50yrs+.

normal inkjet papers of course can use and you get great results but not 100% waterproof.

J@son Ch'ng · 22nd April 2005

Thanks everyone for your recommendations and experience sharing, especially metalgear for detail experience sharing.

Personal rating :
1) R800
2) Pixma 8500
3) Pixma 5000

Hope I've made the right choice.

grantyale · 22nd April 2005

A little input here

Kodak Ultima ColorLast paper claims an overal lifespan of over 100 years with most genuine dye-based inks from Canon and HP, all limiting factors considered including UV, ozone and moisture(50% used, but here is easily over 80% I guess?). It's difficult to tell how well it really works though. It's not totally water resistant - check out the samples in Popular (I saw some in Jurong Point branch at least).

21st April 2005	#1
J@son Ch'ng Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Zion City Posts: 159	Epson R800 or Canon Pixma I'm looking to acquire a fast good quality, low print cost 4R and A4 printer. Can any R800 owner and i5000 or i8000 user share their experience and recommendation please? Many thanks

21st April 2005	#5
Watcher Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: The heart of the Abyss Posts: 2,319	The R800 is using pigment inks that last a very long time, even on standard glossy paper. I've posted links in the printer forum regarding the longevity. Another user who had bought his iP8500 or iP6000 ended up with fading prints (his own words) and became a white elephant. Edit: The post by kuoann of his experience with iP8500 is here Last edited by Watcher; 21st April 2005 at 11:13 AM. Reason: Adding the links

21st April 2005	#2
sooming Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 154	Hi Jason, I'm using the Canon Pixma IP5000, quite an acceptable quality at 4R and up to A4, but the Epson R800 is a different league altogether. It's more comparable to the Pixma IP8500, and with the additional (individual ink catridge) for R-G-B, the colours on the Epson will be better.

21st April 2005	#3
metalgear Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 590	What I did was to take a CF card with a high-res favourite pix down to the Canon, HP and Epson showrooms at funan for sample prints across their printer range. These guys don't sell, so they are there to extoll the virtues of the different models and technologies. You ought to do this at A4 size as 4R size is hard to see details. Better if you are familiar with the original setting/lighting as the subtle colour casts become very obvious when you put them head-to-head. In the end its personal choice. I found that the mid range printers produced nice contrasty shots with "punchy" consumer appeal, while the higher end products tends to be more "mellow" - but closer to the real thing. Keep your shots for a week and wait for the ink/gloss to settle and make your conclusions. I didn't do any drastic testing but it was clear to me at the end that the Epson R800 was a clear winner being very neutral and even - difficult high colour and contrast shots were evenly dealt with. The Canon has a colour casts by model - and the colour signature differs greatly from model to model - you have to see it to believe it. I found this a little unnerving. The HP - really nice prints too, except that ink is really going to get expensive about +30% above Canon/Epson overall. I didn't do a B&W test, but believe that specific grey inks make it their strength. What's peculiar about the R800 is its pigment ink - it costs about $21 per ink tank about 16% more than their average ink. But a special gloss optimizer provides a "commercial-print" finish, especially when used on matte paper. On paper, I found it works well too on Ilford and HP papers, which may be cheaper but of comparable (or even better) quality than the Epson.

21st April 2005	#4
tunster Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 1,438	Practically Epson gives you better photo quality. But Epson likes to built-in their print heads unlike Canon. Canon separate their print head from the printer and ink tank for easier and cheaper maintenance fee. So, it is still up to you to decide.

21st April 2005	#6
tao Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Land of the Vegetables Posts: 2,958	image quality wise, you can't go wrong with Epson, it is really better and you get waterproof and longlasting prints when using Durabrite papers. I noticed that all fineart photographers who do their own inkjet prints go for Epson.

22nd April 2005	#9
J@son Ch'ng Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Zion City Posts: 159	Thanks everyone for your recommendations and experience sharing, especially metalgear for detail experience sharing. Personal rating : 1) R800 2) Pixma 8500 3) Pixma 5000 Hope I've made the right choice.

22nd April 2005	#10
grantyale Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Pioneer Posts: 1,397	A little input here Kodak Ultima ColorLast paper claims an overal lifespan of over 100 years with most genuine dye-based inks from Canon and HP, all limiting factors considered including UV, ozone and moisture(50% used, but here is easily over 80% I guess?). It's difficult to tell how well it really works though. It's not totally water resistant - check out the samples in Popular (I saw some in Jurong Point branch at least).