Luminous Landscape Forum

Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: IanT on February 19, 2013, 03:30:24 pm

Title: iPF6400
Post by: IanT on February 19, 2013, 03:30:24 pm
Took delivery of my Canon iPF6400 and my first initial impressions are good although I have
not had much time to play with it yet (just a couple of calibration prints) I had been warned about
the amount of ink used during priming but was pleasantly surprised it only used about 10%

Very easy to setup but took a couple of bodies to lift it on to its stand, software easy to install
and the Photoshop plug-in works well just need time to get to know the machine now and print
a few images on different materials.

Final I would like to thank Mark and his team at Graphic Design Supplies Ltd for all there help
and a very speedy delivery of both machine and consumables.

Will do a more in-depth review once I have had a chance to play bit more.

Only question I have is anyone else using the 6400 and if so how are
you getting on with it.

IanT
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Bullfrog on February 19, 2013, 03:55:29 pm
I have a 6100 - so I'm not much help (beyond being a tad jealous)

However, one comment.

Unless they improved the 6400 over the 6100 - my understanding is the measurements for ink levels are in increments of 20% as viewed on the LCD monitor and status monitor.  So, today you are happy with your ink levels and based on the status monitor, everything looks good - and suddenly you dip to 80%.  

The same with the maitenance cartridge.

However, I have found checking the print status job log of actual print job to be very accurate in terms of ink usage -

Interested to hear what others' views are on this printer .

Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: IanT on February 19, 2013, 04:00:15 pm
Cheers for the heads up on the levels I will keep an eye on it and let you know
how it goes.
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Sal Baker on February 20, 2013, 05:28:16 am
I'm very interested in hearing what you think about the 6400's new tone controls for the advanced B&W mode.

Sal
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Scott Martin on February 20, 2013, 09:10:35 am
Its great, but don't forget to calibrate!!

http://canonipf.wikispaces.com/message/view/FAQ/12791457
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: IanT on February 20, 2013, 04:43:53 pm
Cheers will get calibration done as soon as I get 5min I am
juggling to many things at the moment and can’t even get a chance
to run the machine.
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Josh-H on February 21, 2013, 03:49:22 am
Quote
Only question I have is anyone else using the 6400 and if so how are
you getting on with it.

I have the previous model the 6350 (same ink and head set though). Its been a workhorse for me; although I have already been through two print heads. Apart from that I love it and prefer it to the 9400 I have as well. 60" paper is just a nightmare to handle.
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Lust4Life on April 20, 2013, 10:10:59 am
How about an update on your opinion of the Canon?

I've used Epson 17" printers for many years - have read soooo much negative about the new generation that I'm seriously thinking of Canon, the 6400 flavor.  Would like to be able to go to 24" on occasion.

Big issue for me is that I may not print anything for a month -- that seems to be a death nail for the Epsons.

Jack
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: sjphotos on April 20, 2013, 07:52:01 pm
Have had mine about 4 months and it has exceeded my expectations. Not so much in print quality,I new I would get that, but in ease of operation. I've printed on rolls and all sizes of sheet paper and never a a miss feed. Changing rolls is a snap, cut sheets feed 1st time and every time. I can let it sit for a week or two and never a problem. I do a lot of B&W printing and I can get deep rich blacks with no bronzing. Great tonal range. The prints are absolutely stunning. I had an Epson 7800 prior and this printer is a joy to use by comparison. No knock on Epson. I still use my 3880 for smaller prints and I absolutely love that printer as well. As a test I printed a 17x22 on each, same paper and profiles and the prints are identical. Cannot make out any difference what so ever.
Loading profiles are easy and I also find navigating through the printers monitor easy as well. Hopefully all the operations I have experienced so far with this printer will remain constant over time. Will report back after the first year. The real test will be the test of time.

Enjoy your new printer and I hope you love yours a s much as I love mine.

Best,
SJ
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Lust4Life on April 21, 2013, 06:20:39 am
Thanks for the feedback - that's what I was hoping to read!

Now, to wait for their next Rebate promotion or find a dealer desperate to sell one - see I just missed a good rebate that ended last month.

Jack
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Sal Baker on April 21, 2013, 07:57:04 am
Thanks for the feedback - that's what I was hoping to read!

Now, to wait for their next Rebate promotion or find a dealer desperate to sell one - see I just missed a good rebate that ended last month.

Jack

B&H had it on sale for $1,650 w/free shipping a few months ago.  The sale only lasted a short while so keep your eyes open.

Sal
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: JimGoshorn on April 21, 2013, 05:49:55 pm
I am very interested in hearing reports on this printer. As one of those with a 7900 with a failed printhead, I am researching all options.

Jim
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: JohnBrew on April 21, 2013, 06:07:14 pm
I've had mine for several months now and could not be happier. No worries about not printing for a while as the printer stays on all the time and runs it's own maintenance. I also have a 3880 and was hoping the Canon would be as good for bw. It is and more. I've already printed a five foot bw pano and was thrilled with the results.
I purchased mine as I had concerns about the 7900. Also the size and weight were a concern and the Canon has a smaller footprint (it had to travel up three flights of stairs!).
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: JimGoshorn on April 21, 2013, 06:15:18 pm
From what I have heard, the print quality is supposed to be indistinguishable from the Epson printers. I do wonder how long the printheads will last before requiring replacement which will cost about $1,000 for the pair.

Jim
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: sjphotos on April 21, 2013, 06:30:29 pm
I got mine when B&H had it for $1904.00 and $300.00 rebate plus free shipping. Received my rebate in about 4 weeks. I paid no tax and free shipping. Total investment $1604.00. Got it at just at the right time. I new this was too good a of deal to pass up especially since I was in need and ready to make the purchase.
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Lust4Life on April 22, 2013, 06:05:28 am
Just did a search and the lowest I can find today is $2299.00 at B&H.
Long way to go to get savings mentioned above.

Looks like I'll be in a holding pattern till another round of rebates are offered.

Jack
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Paris1968 on April 22, 2013, 10:06:41 pm
At least as compared to the Canon 6300, the Epson 7900 produces superior prints.  I own both, and while the Canon produces truly wonderful prints, and while the quality difference isn't great and may not matter for most jobs,  it is noticeable.  The Canon, OTOH, has advantages over the Epson: it never clogs, it never needs nozzle cleanings, it is more economical with its ink, it has a great PS Export plug-in, it has a built in accounting program and a built in calibration function, and it is fundamentally more reliable.
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Sal Baker on April 22, 2013, 11:05:38 pm
I haven't compared the 6300, but to my eyes the 7900 and 6400 prints are both stellar and indistinguishable from each other.  I haven't looked at either under a microscope though.

Sal
Title: iPF6400 on its way
Post by: keith_cooper on April 23, 2013, 04:30:03 am
Canon UK have just told me they are sending a 6450 (6400+spectro) for a while to try out, for a review.

Given I've an iPF8300 here, I'll be curious to see any print differences, and how practical/useful that spectro is (it certainly looks ugly, but I'm told is removable).

As ever, if anyone has specific questions, just mail me and I'll add them to the 'to look at' list ;-)
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Lust4Life on April 23, 2013, 07:14:14 am
In my experience there are two distinct groups of us that print; those that have focused on their photography work as a source of income and as such are printing on a regular basis and those like myself where it is an obsession but not something where we have enough demand to print several times a week. 

Most of my printing is to just knock out a print of an image I've just finished and like for myself or my family members use.  Occasionally a friend will ask me for a print and I do one as a gift.  I go through spells where I'll get wrapped up in working on 2 or 3 of my files and finally get them to a point that I'm satisfied and want a print.  Them I may go off on a tangent with one of my other obsessions, say flying R/C gliders, and not get back to photography for four or five weeks.

Now, I could send my files off to a shop to be printed BUT being the Poster Child for the N.American Anal Retentive we know I'd never be happy with their work!  Thus I'm stuck with doing it myself.

Being 90+% of my work is B&W printing, some panoramas, there are just two issues a printer must meet for me to be satisfied:
1.  Outstanding B&W print, with excellent color for the times I'm needing it.
2.  Ability to forget the printer for up to 5 weeks and still have it function properly when I return. (OK, if I have to I could set an alert in the computer to remind me to do a text print every 2.5 weeks just to exercise the printer.)

I've read at length the hundreds of pages here where folks have spent large amounts of time, money and frustration with the new gen of Epsons.  On a relative basis, that does not seem to exist for Canon.

I had the Epson 4800 for several years and it rarely clogged up on me.  But we moved last fall and I sold it.  Part of not having any problem with the Epson may have been contributed to by the high humidity of where we were living at the time - Naples, FL.  Now in Chapel Hill, NC and in the winter it takes a humidifier on the furnance to keep the house at just 30% humidity.

In short, how about quality of B&W prints on the Canon verse the Epson?

Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: sjphotos on April 23, 2013, 12:59:56 pm
I stated in an earlier post, the B&W prints from my 6400 are to my eye an exact match to prints printed on my Epson 3880.
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Paris1968 on April 23, 2013, 03:45:26 pm
The Canon 6300 makes beautiful prints and I use it a lot, but you won't need a microscope to see the difference between prints from a 6300 and those from a 7900.  You might not know what acounts for the difference untill you do look closely, but you'll spot it at a normal distance.  For that reason, when I want the best results I can get, I use the 7900. This review from The McNamara Report (below)  has a few good examples of what I mean.  The comments about the relative speed of the printers are bunk, but he is spot on about their quality differences.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsfJEQsMt3c (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsfJEQsMt3c)


Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Lust4Life on April 23, 2013, 04:38:56 pm
Just watched the video - thanks for posting it!

Chap seems to be through in his review - sure presents a choice that is not to my liking:
1.  Canon - less clog issues but for my critical standards image not a detailed/smooth/sharp as Epson
2.  Epson - best image but could be buying a nightmare due to it's clogging history.

Neither of those choices are making me pull money from my wallet!

Jack
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Darrel on April 23, 2013, 05:19:18 pm
That video is a biased Epson commercial.
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: sjphotos on April 23, 2013, 07:00:08 pm
In all honesty I think too many people spend too much time comparing and anaylizing to death, trying to figure out which printer is best etc., etc. in the end your final print will be a result of the file your working with. My approach is to go all the way back to where it all begins and that is in the camera, the very 1st step in the process. I spend the most time and concentration there. A great image file will look good printed on any good printer.
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Justin B on April 23, 2013, 09:23:05 pm
In all honesty I think too many people spend too much time comparing and anaylizing to death, trying to figure out which printer is best etc., etc. in the end your final print will be a result of the file your working with. My approach is to go all the way back to where it all begins and that is in the camera, the very 1st step in the process. I spend the most time and concentration there. A great image file will look good printed on any good printer.

Yeah, if you are using quality media and a good profile.  :)

I have both a 9900 and an iPF8400 and prints that are compared side-by-side are notably different in terms of fine detail. Sure, nozzle checks have to be done quite frequently on the Epson, but the quality is certainly there. How particular you (or your customers) are is the main question!
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: sjphotos on April 23, 2013, 10:36:31 pm
My clients are always blown away at the quality of prints, but they are not my biggest critic. Prints have to get by me first before they are ever seen. I was printing with an epson 7800 prior, the prints from my 6400 are noticably better. Not really fair to compare since one uses 8 inks the other 12. I'm also now shooting with a D800 and my files have more detail. It is still, in my opinion, the final print is a product of the entire workflow.
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: JimGoshorn on April 24, 2013, 12:59:56 pm
Is there a noticeable difference between the 6300 and 6400 printers? Maybe that is why some answers say that Epson is better than the 6300 and others seem to indicate that the 6400 and Epson are very similar. Just trying to get at a more definitive answer...

Thanks for all the input!

Jim
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Paris1968 on April 24, 2013, 03:39:21 pm
I can't say if the 6400 produces a better quality or sharper print than the 6300. I know that when the 6400 came out I considered upgrading as I had done from the 6200 to the 6300, but something in the initial reviews gave me the impression that it wasn't worth it.  I use the  6300 and the 7900 differently.  I do many event posters, and then also restore old theatrical posters and photographs from huge TIFF files. The new posters I print out on the 6300 because it's reliable and it does a great job.  Really, the quality is supurb.  I load it with a roll of paper and away it goes to the end of the roll. The restorations and fine art (if you will) I print on the 7900 because (1) I want the very best results, (2) they are going to looked at closely for quality, (3) I am only doing one or two at a time (4) I am changing paper in the 7900 fequently (canvas to matt to metallic for example) and it's a snap as compared to my experience changing paper with the 6300.

Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Lust4Life on April 24, 2013, 06:58:12 pm
As to the quality of the capture device - camera - I'm shooting with a Hasselblad H4D 50MP.
Digital files are outstanding.

Thus I want a printer than can put all quality down in a beautiful manner - no blocked highlights and full detail in shadows.

Jack
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Scott Martin on April 24, 2013, 10:08:18 pm
Thus I want a printer than can put all quality down in a beautiful manner - no blocked highlights and full detail in shadows.

Well that has more to do with your color management than the printer itself...
Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Lust4Life on April 24, 2013, 10:18:27 pm
Not in full agreement with that statement.
I built my own custom profiles for the paper/printer.
If the printer can't delivery the full digital content sent to it with custom profiles, then you've just wasted your time and money.

Title: Re: iPF6400
Post by: Scott Martin on April 24, 2013, 10:21:20 pm
So what are you saying?