HP Z2100 vs Epson 4800 vs Canon Ipf 5000 shootout...
I've recently witnessed a 'shootout' of the above machines as set up by a local Melbourne distributor of the three brands... both to bring the salefolk up to speed and to engender interest in the soon to arrive HP Z series.
I'm in the market for a new Archival med. format printer. I'm very fussy about what I want and I'm wanting much in a machine.
I'm wanting a machine that will serve for many years and IMHO I think that the current market has not quite reached its zenith in value for money (like I think maybe the SLR Digital Camera market has done for example).
I'm debating which of the three machines would suit my business extention (currently I'm a conservation picture framer and oil artist) into professional-grade printing with wedding photographers in mind and other photographic and digital artists.
Below were my criteria I've been working with while researching these past 12 months... and with each new machine release one hopes more of the 'wish list' functions would be met.
My Criteria... roughly in order of preference
1. 17" or 24" archival grade inkjet.
2. Extremely fine detail with very wide colour gamut
3. Economical ink usage
4. Adequate range of Wilhelm tested photo and fine art papers available
5. Good backup service
6. Good speed and reasonably quiet
7. Can manage rolls, cassette loaded paper and matboard thick media (i.e. 1.5mm)
8. Reasonable user interface with clear colour-management instructions (if there is such a thing as I'm pretty new to this labyrinth...)
9. Size... which has only become an issue when I actually saw how much of my workshop would be dedicated to the machine after seeing the Canon!
Anyway... my somewhat naive but critical responses to the results of the shootout at the distributors...
HP Z2100
(the 3100 with the gloss optimizer was not available though some prints from HP were available... but these don't really show a great range of gamut or detail, so I like to put my own images through the machines so I can compare apples with apples). I was able to do this with the HP 2100, the Epson 7800, and the Canon IPF 5000.
Positives vs negatives.
+ built in spectro... enabled almost perfect matches from paper to paper with the same images! ... due of course to the built in spectro. This is HP's most outstanding feature and if you plan to use a wide variety of papers, this feature is a must. No more building or buying paper profiles!!
+ very good gamut & excellent detail
+ archival inks and fair range of OEM papers
+ good user interface and manual
+ good backup service (at least in Melb. Australia)
+ appears to be economical with 130ml cartridges but you have to replace print heads x 4 every 3 lots of cartridges ($95AU per head;)
+ reasonably compact for its 24" output
+ water resistant inks though they scuff easily (less so with the gloss optimized samples)
+ excellent gray scale
- built in spectro... if you use a limited range of papers, the cost is high for the machine (approx. $6800 AU inc. tax for the 24" Z2100... excl. stand & media bin = extra $522 inc. tax, compared with Ep. 7800 24" around $5000AU, and Canon 17"around $3000 AU)
- no cassettes as each single sheet must be manually fed from the rear. So the machine needs an operator there full time if you are printing on anything but rolls!
- maximum paper thickness is only 0.8mm.
Epson 4800/7800
+ good colour gamut with excellent detail.
+ excellent range of OEM & 3rd party papers with numerous 3rd party profiles available.
+ good archival grade inks
+ good after sales service
+ good user interface
+ if you use the machine constantly to prevent head clogging, it is very reliable & economical with large cartridges... if you don't change blacks!
+ 4800 (but not 7800 which apart from roll feed is a single sheet feed... and quite awkward at that), has multi sheet cassette type tray for doing unattended multiple images
+ excellent gray scale
+ does not scuff as easily as HP but appears water resistant
+ good size footprint
+ takes 1.5mm thick media
- the black ink cartridge changing = absolute waste of time and ink/money issue
- head clogging a high likelihood if machine is not running hot daily = absolute waste of time and ink/money issue (still waiting to hear about the Ep 3800 regarding this)
- need to buy specialist profiles for each paper to get best from machine (or spend on spectro & add more time and yet another steep learning curve)
Canon IPF 5000
+ excellent colour & detail
+ archival inks (still under test by Wilhelm)
+ fair range of papers (still under test by Wilhelm)
+ appears to be very economical with no head clogging issues
+ scuffing appears less than HP but inks are not water resistant
+ cassette feed + single feet tray feed + roll feed = plenty of options
+ takes 1.5mm thick media
- pathetic user interface and manual will no doubt frustrate and confuse new users (like me!)... as if colour management isn't enough of an issue even for the experienced! This is my main issue with this machine... the amount of unnecessary learning & tweeking involved.
- Canon backup appears to be somewhat lacking from reports from two distributors here in Aus.
- no 24" option offered
- inks are not water resistant (though this would not be a problem with works being framed, and you can spray on a sealer if they stay exposed)
- takes up far too much room for the size of the print it produces... though I suppose this is partly offset by the fact it needs space behind for the very thick media capacity straight through paper path
- need to buy specialist profiles for each paper to get best from machine (or spend on spectro & add more time and yet another steep learning curve)
General Conclusions
Each machine produced excellent detail and continuous tone. They each had excellent colour but the Canon with the 12 colour inkset produced wider range... particularly of blues/mauves.
Each machine offers good OEM paper selection, though Epson has more... though one rep. spoke of the annoyance expressed of late by some long term Epson users finding unacceptable variations in the Epson papers which may be due to slight alterations in paper formulations to comply with the new ink sets with the latest machines.
They each had adequate speed and quietness of operation for my purposes.
None of the machines at max. resolution showed any better detail than my Ep. 1290, which is not to say they are poor, but that technology enabling detail is no longer an issue with machines over the past 3-4 years. They're all outstanding.
All these pigment ink machines show some gloss differential on gloss papers which can only probably be really eliminated by use of a gloss enhancer which the machine sprays on (eg like the HPZ 3100 series) or do it yourself after.
I'd already discounted in my mind the 4800/7800 mainly because of the head clogging issue which so many seem to have had problems with (as I have with my 1290) and ink cartridge swaping issue... which I'd need to be doing regularly. The Epson 3800 is not yet available here for trial and while I'm currently still open to it, I'm disappointed with the lack of roll feeder, and the smaller cartridge capacity... and from forum users - it does not appear to be very economical. But I've had no samples from it to compare with my many samples from the other machines.
So where am I at in choosing a machine? Closer than 6 months ago but not convinced this is quite the right time to jump in yet.
Do I need to have a built in spectro? Just how many papers am I going to offer customers? How much money do I want sitting there in stock? How many archivally-untested papers do I want to promote or offer? How much time do I want to put in to unravelling Canon's messy directions and foibles? And why hasn't Canon forecast a 24" model? It's unlike them to leave out any segment of a market... if cameras are anything to go by.
Still ruminating... but I hope this has been helpful to someone. There are many on this forum who have been very helpful to me.