Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: David White on September 25, 2007, 12:28:35 pm
-
I found a review of the 6100 on Photography Blog (http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_canon_ipf6100.php) this morning. It is a nice overall review of the printer but does not get into detail on whether the 5000's deficiencies - paper path selection, black point compensation, etc. - have been corrected. There is a reference that indicates that the documentation is of a higher quality but no reference as to how well the documentation covers the details and specifics of the available printer settings.
I will certainly be awaiting Michael's review.
-
I found a review of the 6100 on Photography Blog (http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_canon_ipf6100.php) this morning. It is a nice overall review of the printer but does not get into detail on whether the 5000's deficiencies - paper path selection, black point compensation, etc. - have been corrected. There is a reference that indicates that the documentation is of a higher quality but no reference as to how well the documentation covers the details and specifics of the available printer settings.
I will certainly be awaiting Michael's review.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=141768\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I too will be awaiting Michael's more comprehensive review. I found the one on Photography blog this morning to be a fine re-statement of the sales brochure with not much meat for an objective review. I also hope we get a true comparison review between the top three, HP, Canon and Epson and their current offerings. This I would find more useful and valuable that simple praises. Then perhaps we can truly understand our options and make good buying choices
mike
-
I found the one on Photography blog this morning to be a fine re-statement of the sales brochure with not much meat for an objective review. I also hope we get a true comparison review between the top three, HP, Canon and Epson and their current offerings.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=141980\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have to agree, disappointing that there wasn't more specific information. At the Wiki, we have noted a number of problems with the iPF5000 and want to know whether they have been fixed with the ipFX100 generation. Unfortunately, no answers were forthcoming from the review
--John
-
Hi,
Thanks to everyone for their feedback.
Feel free to leave questions in our comments section, and we'll do our best to answer them...
Canon iPF6100 Review (http://www.photographyblog.com/index.php/weblog/comments/canon_ipf6100_review/)
-
Hi,
Thanks to everyone for their feedback.
Feel free to leave questions in our comments section, and we'll do our best to answer them...
Canon iPF6100 Review (http://www.photographyblog.com/index.php/weblog/comments/canon_ipf6100_review/)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=142243\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks. Done.
--John
-
Uwe Steinmueller's Canon iPF6100 Diary: http://www.outbackphoto.com/CONTENT_2007_0...6100/index.html (http://www.outbackphoto.com/CONTENT_2007_01/section_output_printing/20070928_IPF6100/index.html)
-
Uwe Steinmueller's Canon iPF6100 Diary: http://www.outbackphoto.com/CONTENT_2007_0...6100/index.html (http://www.outbackphoto.com/CONTENT_2007_01/section_output_printing/20070928_IPF6100/index.html)
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=142292\")
He writes:
dMax
We measured 1.58 on Hahnemuehle Photo Rag. This is a good value.
1.58 Dmax isn't a good value on PhotoRag in my opinion. With the Z3100 it's above 1.7 D and on my old 9000 quad with MIS inks it was just below 1.70 D. I wonder whether the PK is used instead of the MK for some reason.
Ernst Dinkla
try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
-
Some information about the iPF6100 has been discovered from various sources. The problems which are fixed (and those which aren't) are detailed on the Known Problems section of the Wiki:
http://canonipf5000.wikispaces.com/Conside...ng+This+Printer (http://canonipf5000.wikispaces.com/Considerations+Before+Buying+This+Printer)
Fixed: Maximum sheet length for all iPFX100 printers for top manual feed is now 62 inches (was 24 inches on iPF5000)
Fixed: Centering bug in Photoshop plugin on Super B paper (also fixed for iPF5000 in plugin version 2.04)
Not fixed: Media Types still lock out some paper paths. This is a big disappointment for anyone who prints using third party papers. A couple of possible solutions are outlined, we will be checking with Canon on this.
--John
-
Not fixed: Media Types still lock out some paper paths. This is a big disappointment for anyone who prints using third party papers. A couple of possible solutions are outlined, we will be checking with Canon on this.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=142830\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
John,
Thanks for the update. This is really disappointing. I certainly hope that Canon will be more responsive on this than they have been on a mirror lock-up button on their cameras.
I may have to end up waiting for the next generation of Epsons if this is not corrected.