It looks like my Epson 7900 is probably down for the count with a piezo failure. It gave me five years, and I'm looking for someone who wants it for Piezography (it has nine good channels and a blown yellow). I'm looking for the replacement, and my current thought is a Canon PRO-2000. Since I'm a landscape photographer who goes on long shooting trips, my printer sits for substantial periods of time (sometimes a month or more). I make about 50 final 24x36" prints a year, figure 3-4 times that with test prints and the like, plus some smaller prints, and I'm hoping to double or maybe triple that with some printing for other artists in the next year or two. For a five to ten (twenty if I get some work printing for others) roll per year print load, I'm not sure I can keep an Epson going, especially with the burst nature of my printing.
I've been reading that the P series is a lot less clog prone than their predecessors, so maybe an Epson P7000 IS a consideration - is it still not recommended for long absences with the new heads?
The dark horse is, of course, HP - the speed doesn't bother me, but the age of the Z3200ps without an update might. I don't have room for the 44", even though it's a lot lighter than the competing 44" models - it's still very long. The 24" Z3200ps looks like it sells for almost the price of the 44" (and nearly $1000 more than the best quote I have on the Canon). How does it compare to the Pro 2000 in gamut, specifically on baryta type papers. How does the Z3200ps handle the MK/PK switch?
In practice, I've printed quite a bit of matte paper when I've been using Canons (I've had both Canon and Epson, and I've used HP GIS/CAD printers, but never their photo printers over the years, and I've generally had somewhat better experiences with the Canons) - I'll throw a roll of matte in the printer to see how a given image looks. I haven't used much matte on the Epsons, because of the ink switch - is it worth switching the printer over because I think "that might look good on watercolor paper"?
