Canon Pro 1000 vs Epson P800

[lelouarn]

So after some time, any conclusions on the propensity to clogs on any of the two machines ? My really old Epson R-1800 was really bad at this, and I do not want another printer that requires constant declogging cycles.
I do not print very often, and so this was a big issue for me. Otherwise, the P800 looks really nice (I do a lot of panos, so the Canon is less attractive, although it seems it doesn't clog - or it "internally" clogs, and you then change the print head after a while).

[Mark D Segal]

If you want to keep doing panoramas that exceed the length limitation of the Canon Pro-1000, your decision is made - it's an Epson P800. The clogging business, however, is a bit more complicated than you portray it. My experience using the Epson P800 since the beginning of February is that unless you make at least one multi-colour print every five days or so it will need at least one cleaning cycle - this is in my working conditions and those vary from user to user; my humidity range is between 22~40% normally. The Canon Pro-1000 has pre-programmed maintenance which the user does not control. If the printer hasn't been used for a while, when you switch it on it will shake the ink cartridges and do a head cleaning, which latter uses ink. We do not know how much. After a certain amount of printing, the printer will trigger head cleaning. We do not know the periodicity or the amount of ink used. If the cleaning cycles fail to declog nozzles, there is an algorithm to work around those nozzles which is fine until the number of redundant nozzles is consumed and the print head needs replacement. There is no data indicating the conditions in which this would become necessary. Bottom line: both printers clog, but the way of handling it differs considerably between them. It is arguably the case that the Canon procedure needs considerably less user intervention than the Epson procedure, but the latter is pretty easy to manage; both consume time and ink.

[Czornyj]

Canon iPF PRO-1000 doesn't ever clog, period.

First of all, a thermal nozzle is dozens of times smaller than than a nozzle with piezoelectric membrane, so there's way less space for air bubbles to gather, that are the main cause of clogging.

A thermal nozzle produces much more pressure than piezo membrane, so it's also easier to eject air bubbles, or at worst to clean clogged nozzle.

Due to the fact, that the nozzles are so small, there's 1200 nozzles per inch, so each nozzle has spare nozzle. If a nozzle becomes clogged while printing it is electronically detected and compensated in the next pass of the carriage by the spare nozzle. The clogged nozzle is then cleaned after the print is finished. At the end of each printing the print head is also covered with silicone by the wiper to prevent drying on capping station.

The printer is also automatically maintaining the print head while it's not printing - it routinely checks if the nozzles are in working condition, puts the fresh silicone on its surface. The ink carts are also agitated.

From my experience with iPFx300 and x400 series (with exactly the same maintenance system), and after 3500sqm printed on my private iPF8300 I can assure that - contrary to Epson - the amount of ink that is used for head maintenance is negligible - the thermal print head is much less prone to clogging, and way easier to unclog.

Furthermore, the fact that you don't need to control print quality, do nozzle checks, waste paper when head starts clogging in the middle of large print on expensive fine art paper, nor waste time and ink for cleanings is invaluable. I never made a nozzle check since I bought iPF6350, and then iPF8300. I also stopped staring at printer while printing and praying so it won't ruin my prints on rags and barytas - I just press print, do other things or go to sleep and collect perfect prints from the basket when they are finished.

[Mark D Segal]

Canon iPF PRO-1000 doesn't ever clog, period.

I think it would be more accurate to observe that the Canon printer may infrequently produce clogs that require user intervention because its built-in maintenance procedures mitigate the conditions that would produce them, "under the hood". However, Canon itself does not make the claim in the first line of your post. In particular, see pages 218, 231, 238, 414, 463, 562, 635, 660 and 661 of the Pro-1000 manual, all dealing with the potential for clogs and what either the printer or the users does about them.

All the Epson professional pigment-based inkjet printers I've used over the past 16 years except for the P2000 and the 3800/3880 did/do require head cleaning *before* a print session if left idle for more than a few days or operated in a less humid environment than Epson recommends; however, only twice in the context of many thousands of prints did I ever need to toss a print because of ink flow being interrupted during printing; hence, my experience indicates this is a rare occurrence. FWIW - not to say everyone's experience is the same.

[Chris Kern]

My experience using the Epson P800 since the beginning of February is that unless you make at least one multi-colour print every five days or so it will need at least one cleaning cycle - this is in my working conditions and those vary from user to user; my humidity range is between 22~40% normally.

While I generally try to make at least one print a week on my P800 to reduce the risk of clogging, I've left it idle for as long as three weeks during the year I've owned it without experiencing any problem.  However, my unit is installed in a basement where the humidity typically is in the 50-65 percent range.  (I have a humidifier inserted in the ventilating airflow, so the humidity never falls below 50 percent, even during the coldest days of winter.)