Brand New Canon IPF6400 $1,799 - go for it?

[uintaangler]

I have been very happy with my Epson 4900 ( as long as I print a nozzle check every day ) but would love to move up to 24" wide
How does the Canon IPF8400 compare to the new Epson 24" wide printers?
Is Canon rolling out something new that I would be better served waiting for?
Thanks.

[deanwork]

Yes, Canon is rolling out something new, a new line of IPF printers. They have improved the speed of the machines and they have a slightly better gamut I believe ( though I certainly have no need to either of these changes.) The bad thing they did was screw up the inkset in regard to it's longevity. Now it has become the least permanent out there, with Epson cleaning their clock in the area of print permanence, ( and possibly bw rendition as well with their 4 mono ink models )

So, in my opinion the prices on the 8400 models are a fantastic buy if you want 44". It's like buy a set of inks and get the printer free.  Actually the best buy I've seen in the 15 years I've been doing this. I almost thought about buying another one but just don't need it and they are so damn big and heavy to move around. I wouldn't buy one of the new about to be released ones if the permanence is what they say it is, I'd probably go for one of the Epson's and I've been down on Epson for about 9 years.

John

I have been very happy with my Epson 4900 ( as long as I print a nozzle check every day ) but would love to move up to 24" wide
How does the Canon IPF8400 compare to the new Epson 24" wide printers?
Is Canon rolling out something new that I would be better served waiting for?
Thanks.

[uintaangler]

Correction, it is the 24" IPF6400 that is being offered for $1,799.

[MHMG]

Now it has become the least permanent out there, with Epson cleaning their clock in the area of print permanence, ( and possibly bw rendition as well with their 4 mono ink models )

We don't really know that yet about Canon's latest ink set. On the face of it in consideration of the latest (and woefully incomplete) longevity claims Canon has published to date about its latest printers and inks, your comment might well be true   Canon may very well have decided longevity isn't a major selling point (it probably isn't) and have opted to trade longevity for equal or  improved color gamut without the use of the primary green and blue (violet) inks used in the older set.  However, I'm personally finding it hard to believe Canon's chemists and management team allowed this backwards slide in longevity and much easier to believe Canon's marketing folks have just bungled their print longevity message.  The new Canon ink set has yet to be tested independently and in a direct head-to-head comparison against the new Epson ink set on a few key media. When that happens we will know for sure.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

[Benny Profane]

But, will the ink still be available for the older model for some time?

[MHMG]

But, will the ink still be available for the older model for some time?

It's got to be all gravy for Canon to keep the Lucia EX set in play for several more years. There's a huge fleet of iPF8300s and iPf8400s out there all using this same cartridge set. As I noted in my prior post in this thread, the jury is still out on print longevity with the newest Canon ink set, and Lucia EX does really well in my lightfastness tests, so far outperforming the latest Epson ink set in recent test on two different media, but the latest Epson set is handily outperforming earlier Epson K3 inks, yellow being the very weak link. So, I'm in no rush at all to trade my older iPF8300 for a new model. Yes, the upgrade price to go from an iPF8300 to newer iPF8400 is close to the price of a full set of new 300ml ink cartridges plus heads (which typically need replacement every two years), but these printers are huge beasts, and the thought of getting rid of the old one and moving in a new one is so off putting to me (been there done that) that I'm inclined just to keep feeding my iPF8300 new ink cartridges until the machine itself finally bites the dust.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

[deanwork]

There are also a lot of the larger models and the 24 inch models out there all over the world and will be for a long time.

Well, yea. They are super robust machines and the 8300 I have was made in Japan as apposed to China.
I can't see anything to wear out on the 8300 the way I use it other than the normal replacement of heads. After all this time even my paper cutter is working fine. You can fry the mainboard and other circuits in a lightning storm if you don't unplug it, but that can happen with any new printer. So, I'm like you, the last thing I want to do is move this sucker. There is no advantage to the 8400 for me or their new models if they don't add another gray. But if I didn't have one the prices now are amazing and about 1/3 the price of the new Epson P10K, which we haven't see the results of yet.

john

It's got to be all gravy for Canon to keep the Lucia EX set in play for several more years. There's a huge fleet of iPF8300s and iPf8400s out there all using this same cartridge set. As I noted in my prior post in this thread, the jury is still out on print longevity with the newest Canon ink set, and Lucia EX does really well in my lightfastness tests, so far outperforming the latest Epson ink set in recent test on two different media, but the latest Epson set is handily outperforming earlier Epson K3 inks, yellow being the very weak link. So, I'm in no rush at all to trade my older iPF8300 for a new model. Yes, the upgrade price to go from an iPF8300 to newer iPF8400 is close to the price of a full set of new 300ml ink cartridges plus heads (which typically need replacement every two years), but these printers are huge beasts, and the thought of getting rid of the old one and moving in a new one is so off putting to me (been there done that) that I'm inclined just to keep feeding my iPF8300 new ink cartridges until the machine itself finally bites the dust.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

[BillK]

Bob,  $1799 is a great price on a 6400.  The reason the prices on the canon large format printers just dropped
is they are clearing them out because the new line coming. The new line will be more expensive than the X400
series and come with much less ink. I think the jury is still out on ink permanence of the new series.

I was once warned to buy a 44" printer over a 24" if I ever planned on printing Canvas. I didn't heed that warning
and made a big mistake.  Because of the extra material you need to stretch a canvas, a 24" is very limiting in how big you can print.
I initially bought a epson 7900, realizing my mistake, I later bought a IPF8300. A couple weeks ago my now 4 year old 8300
started throwing hardware error codes relating to a sensor that monitors the head. Considering all the options I decided to buy a new 8400
at just under 3K. It comes with 2k worth of ink, 12 330ml cartridges. The new Pro 4000 comes with about half the ink or around a 1k difference.

As a financial decision it made no sense to buy one of the new line of printers. I can still use the unused ink in the 8300 in the 8400, well over 1k in ink
that could not be used in the Pro 4000. My customers would never be able to tell the small difference in print quality from the 8400 to the Pro 4000.
The 8400 will be here tomorrow, just tossed the 7900 in the trash to make room for it. I was told the discounts on the canon printers right now "MIGHT" only last
till the end of April, so you don't have much time to make a decision. I think it depends on how fast they sell their remaining stock.

If you still plan on doing art shows, your best profit margin is in big pieces.   Takes a ton of small stuff to add up to much.

My 2cents

Bill

[Benny Profane]

Ok, I searched, but, hard to find the answer to this question. Is this printer much more reliable as a serious home printer that may sit unused for a few months, at least, than the Epsons? I have worked with Epsons in fairly high volume and consistent environments, but the horror stories I have read here about clogged heads when used lightly make me recoil from the thought, even the newer models. At least the Canon head is user serviceable, and fairly affordable.

[Richard.Wills]

How big is your garage?

These machines do like to be used - nastiest thing you can do to them is let them sit for months on end. That said, the Canons do run clean processes automaticaly.
I've run a couple of ipf - 8300 and 8400 under moderate volume, in a workspace that is typically under 40%RH. I have a small shelf of dead printheads (possibly the 8300 was a yellow citrus fruit in disguise, but that is what warranties are there for), but these are a quick swap out, plus a glug of ink.

The 8x00 is way more forgiving of low RH than (our still running) 9800. You do get clogged nozzles, but less so in my experience than on the Epsons. I believe that Utah is somewhat drier than London, but a relatively small room with several MacPros, multiple screens, and aircon can also make a pretty unforgiving environment!

At that price, if it were available leftpond, I'd buy two, and store one for the inks and spare heads

[MHMG]

Ok, I searched, but, hard to find the answer to this question. Is this printer much more reliable as a serious home printer that may sit unused for a few months, at least, than the Epsons? I have worked with Epsons in fairly high volume and consistent environments, but the horror stories I have read here about clogged heads when used lightly make me recoil from the thought, even the newer models. At least the Canon head is user serviceable, and fairly affordable.

The key to making in house inkjet printing truly affordable is to print a lot and to print often. If you can't print often, then print a lot in a single session. If you can't print a lot in a single session then print a small amount regularly. It's as simple as that.

If you don't print often, then expect equipment maintenance issues like clearing clogged nozzles, or in Canon's case, head replacements. If you print regularly but only in small volume then figure less equipment maintenance, but question every day whether you would be better jobbing such low volume out to competent service providers.

The sweet spot in inkjet printing economics is to print regularly and in sufficient volume where the cost of an outside service bureau clearly becomes cost prohibitive.

[Benny Profane]

How long and how much is a a Canon extended warranty? Includes the head? Duh.

[BillK]

Ok, I searched, but, hard to find the answer to this question. Is this printer much more reliable as a serious home printer that may sit unused for a few months, at least, than the Epsons? I have worked with Epsons in fairly high volume and consistent environments, but the horror stories I have read here about clogged heads when used lightly make me recoil from the thought, even the newer models. At least the Canon head is user serviceable, and fairly affordable.

I agree with what the others have said.  The canon printers are more forgiving when it comes to infrequent use and clogs, but I would not let any inkjet printer set idle for a couple months.
Thats asking for trouble. I have a occasionally left mine for up to 2 weeks while I was traveling. A cleaning cycle gets it back up and running. Normally I try and print at least a small print every 3-4 days, doing that seems to keep the printer from running cleaning cycles. Any longer and it will run a cleaning cycle when you try to print.

[MHMG]

How long and how much is a a Canon extended warranty? Includes the head? Duh.

Last time I checked the Canon extended warranty in the USA was about $1200 per year for my 44 inch wide format printer.  I figured I'd be better off buying a second rebated printer as my "warranty" and setting it aside for later use.

[dseelig]

HP are even more forgiving with a lack of use have great longevity and heads are cheap

[deanwork]

So true, and that is a really remarkable thing about them, that they don't get a lot of credit for. My Z is really my back up color printer for about 5 years now and it just sits there for months on end, year after year with nothing going through it at all, even a test. When I'm ready to do a job I just send the fine to the printer and it's always ready, always perfect, and I don't even shake the carts. It monitors the heads at frequent intervals and they never fail to produce perfect results. Slow as hell, but the prints are flawless.

HP could have owned this fine art market but they just don't seem to care as you can clearly see by their software updates. I don't know of anyone that's even selling the printers or inks anymore except for Hp and they certainly never promote them. I don't know of a single art school that uses them or even know they exist. The only time I see Z printers around is in Office Depot or Kinkos, what a waste of great engineering. They just waste NO ink at all, and the inexpensive heads last years and years for me.

John

HP are even more forgiving with a lack of use have great longevity and heads are cheap

[uintaangler]

So true, and that is a really remarkable thing about them, that they don't get a lot of credit for. My Z is really my back up color printer for about 5 years now and it just sits there for months on end, year after year with nothing going through it at all, even a test. When I'm ready to do a job I just send the fine to the printer and it's always ready, always perfect, and I don't even shake the carts. It monitors the heads at frequent intervals and they never fail to produce perfect results. Slow as hell, but the prints are flawless.

HP could have owned this fine art market but they just don't seem to care as you can clearly see by their software updates. I don't know of anyone that's even selling the printers or inks anymore except for Hp and they certainly never promote them. I don't know of a single art school that uses them or even know they exist. The only time I see Z printers around is in Office Depot or Kinkos, what a waste of great engineering. They just waste NO ink at all, and the inexpensive heads last years and years for me.

John

John,
Your HP is your backup printer - do you believe that the quality of the finished print is equal to an Epson or a Canon?
Thanks.

[deanwork]

There are only two reasons why it is my backup printer these days. First is that it is 8.5 years old and I want to keep it around for awhile longer, and second it is just so much slower than my Canon. I like to use it for my own color work where I'm not on a deadline. I also use it for the neutral bw work on matt rag media because the dmax is better, and it makes a difference.

If HP had upgraded this series to a faster unit and allowed larger ink carts I'd probably be using that for everything.

The red gamut is better on the Canon since I have the Z3100 that doesn't have the improved chromatic red, but for most work that is a non-issue.

j

John,
Your HP is your backup printer - do you believe that the quality of the finished print is equal to an Epson or a Canon?
Thanks.

[John Nollendorfs]

John:
You can use the 300ml 772 carts if you swap out the chipped cap from a 70 cart before it's fully empty. I've been using the Yellow, Matte Black, photo black and Lt Gray carts that way for a couple of years. I've been able to buy the 772 carts for about $110@ The only disadvantage, you don't get a reading on how much ink is left in the cart!!!!!! I just periodically take them out and check the weight.

[deanwork]

Thanks John,

That is quite a savings since the 130 ml carts are like $70.00 ea. I use more MK, Light Gray and Gray than anything.

You just leave the ink compartment open I guess.

John:
You can use the 300ml 772 carts if you swap out the chipped cap from a 70 cart before it's fully empty. I've been using the Yellow, Matte Black, photo black and Lt Gray carts that way for a couple of years. I've been able to buy the 772 carts for about $110@ The only disadvantage, you don't get a reading on how much ink is left in the cart!!!!!! I just periodically take them out and check the weight.