iPF5000 Wiki Neutral on Purchase

[John Hollenberg]

Just a note to those of you who are considering purchasing the Canon iPF5000 printer.  I have reorganized the front page and no longer recommend for or against buying the printer.  The problem areas are now listed in descending order of importance, and I have added estimates of how frequent various problems are based on reports to the Wiki and other data.  As you will see, the incidence of some problems is thought to be low, others are somewhat higher.  While the absolute numbers could be off significantly (either too high or low), the estimates will give a good idea of the relative rate of certain problems compared to others.  The main issue which remains is that Canon's response to the problems is sometimes unsatisfactory.

http://canonipf5000.wikispaces.com

--John

[feppe]

Just a note to those of you who are considering purchasing the Canon iPF5000 printer.  I have reorganized the front page and no longer recommend for or against buying the printer.  The problem areas are now listed in descending order of importance, and I have added estimates of how frequent various problems are based on reports to the Wiki and other data.  As you will see, the incidence of some problems is thought to be low, others are somewhat higher.  While the absolute numbers could be off significantly (either too high or low), the estimates will give a good idea of the relative rate of certain problems compared to others.  The main issue which remains is that Canon's response to the problems is sometimes unsatisfactory.

http://canonipf5000.wikispaces.com

--John
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Why was the recommendation changed? Do you have new data, or did you notice something wrong with the old data which came to the don't-buy recommendation? Or did you get [a href=\"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLAPP]SLAPPed[/url] by rabid attack lawyers?

[John Hollenberg]

Why was the recommendation changed? Do you have new data, or did you notice something wrong with the old data which came to the don't-buy recommendation? Or did you get SLAPPed by rabid attack lawyers?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111331\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The recommendation was changed to try to adopt as neutral a stance as possible.  There were some criticisms, which upon reflection I decided had a certain degree of validity, that I was not being as objective as I could.  Granted, I never claimed that that my experiences were representative, but decided it was unfair to Canon to go quite as far as I did.  There are a lot of people who aren't having any problems, and they weren't represented accurately the way the front page was worded.  So, I tried the best I could to remove the emotional overtones and just present the data.  

The data is pretty much the same with the exception of the estimates.  I think the page reads as more objective, although still pretty damning in many ways.  For instance, there is only one remaining case of a printer with image quality problems that Canon has not fixed and refuses to fix.  It's only one case out of probably 500, but it illustrates a corporate rigidity and lack of sensitivity to photographers concerns that is frightening.  Still, I don't think it is right to present this as "everyone is having this problem."  When I realized that some of the information I already had could be used to give rough estimates of how frequent these problems are, I thought that was important information to include.  Personally, the one case would probably frighten me away from buying the printer, but a lot of other people would say, "What's the chance I will end up like this guy--very, very small."

There has been no contact from Canon, so no, the "rabid attack lawyer" conspiracy theory won't fly in this case.  The data is unchanged, but better reorganized to reflect real-world concerns.  I tried to come up with estimates of how frequently problems were occurring (there is a thread where some of this is documented referred to from the front page of the Wiki), so that prospective purchasers could decide for themselves if certain problems or potential problems were acceptable to them.

--John

[tandlh]

Well done John.  I think you have done a great service to us 5000 owners with your Wiki.  I know that the information helped my learning curve greatly.  Fortunately, I haven't experienced any problems with my 5000.  I've tried to put myself in the position of someone who was frustrated by trying to resolve their issues (and I have experience in that trying to deal with Ford) and understand the position taken.  But all in all, I think your changes here accurately reflect the concerns while not polarizing the community that has so many of us really enjoying our printers.  Thanks and keep up the good work,

Ted

[feppe]

Thanks for the clarification. It appears you have made the right decision. The problem of judging any product's usability based on forum postings is always a precarious matter, as most people write about problems, not how great that product is.

Even then, I'll hold off my large format printer purchase until Epson updates their line-up to include proper b&w inks and hopefully a 17" model - I'm guessing later this year - so I can make a more informed decision, and perhaps benefit from a price drop from Canon. Who knows, Canon might come up with an updated ipf5000 soon.

[Mark D Segal]

Even then, I'll hold off my large format printer purchase until Epson updates their line-up to include proper b&w inks and hopefully a 17" model - I'm guessing later this year - [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111349\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Epson already has a 17 inch printer which produces gorgeous B&W output - it is called the 3800. I just returned from PhotoshopWorld in Boston, and best intelligence I could pick-up seems to suggest they will not be issuing another model in that size range for AT LEAST the next 9 months, and probably later. Apart from that I could learn nothing about what they have up their sleeves!

[Nill Toulme]

Epson already has a 17 inch printer which produces gorgeous B&W output - it is called the 3800. ...[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Epson has two 17-inch printers that produce gorgeous B&W output.  The other one is called the 4800.  ;-)

Nill
~~
[a href=\"http://www.toulme.net]www.toulme.net[/url]

[Mark D Segal]

Yes Nill, you are right - I should know because I use one. I was thinking more along the lines of the latest generation where you don't need to waste a bundle of money on ink for switching media between matte and non-matte.

[jpgentry]

John

When I saw your negative status I was initially happy as I figured it may get a result from Canon.  Now that we know they are totally out of touch with their customers and their reputation on the internet I agree with your move back to neutral.  

Canon seems to be a top notch hardware company, but not a top notch customer service company.  That puts many of us in a weird position as we want the best products but want a company who stands behind them and can nimbly support them as is required in this high-tech market.

Anyway you should be on the Canon payroll as far as I'm concerned.  You have facilitated the communication that they lack.  You have single handedly made their solution a workable one.  Shame on them for not having ears...

-Jonathan

[John Hollenberg]

Jonathan,

I keep hearing rumblings from people who have contacts at Canon that things will be changing (but haven't seen it yet).  A large company takes time to make changes.  Recently, there have been reports to the Wiki of very pleasant, no hassle replacement of defective ink cartridges.  So there may be something to this.  I imagine we will know in a couple of months when we see if any official announcements are forthcoming on their web site or elsewhere re: warranty, etc.

The main reason for shifting back to neutral wasn't due to a change in the data.  I just decided that people could make their own decisions based on the facts (as best we know them) and that the negative recommendation might sound to some more like a vendetta against Canon than an honest attempt to improve things.  So the Wiki recommendation will remain neutral unless things get a lot worse or a lot better.  Minor changes won't cut it, since I want the recommendation to be clearly supported by the available data.

--John

[colorguy]

John,

I have always looked upon your site as being incredibly informative.  You are doing a wonderful job maintaining all the information in a smart and organized fashion.  Personally, I think that your neutral stance adds a great deal more credibility to the site and the issues presented.

Keep up the good work.

Sincerely,
Bob
http://www.colorhq.com

[v70rnj]

John;

Let me also say that I really appreciate your objective appraisal of the iPF 5000.

I have had only minimal trouble with mine since getting it in December- an initial reluctance to "wake up" from sleep, cured by doing a power on/off cycle - and a problem loading the updated firmware, driver stuff on the CD from Canon.  The latter turned out to be a problem with my PC, actually - I had had a virus and the problem required lobotomizing the hard drive, doing a clean re-install of Windows, etc.  The updates then loaded OK, so I cannot fault Canon for that.  Both times Canon technical help over the phone was helpful, friendly, and knowledgeable.  No mechanical problems and I am very pleased with the output.  I still use my Epson 1280 for color formats smaller than 8x10" where I don't care about the longevity of the dye-based inks.

Overall I would personally recommend the iPF 5000 to anyone who wants absolutely the best 17" output and uses both matte and lustre papers and is willing to deal with Canon or who is mechanically and computer savvy enough to work with them through issues.  This is not all that unlike my experience with Canon L-series glass and professional bodies.  But I understand and sympathize with those who feel that Canon should do a better job of documentation and standing by customers with complaints.  My other thought is it pays to know the dealer from whom you purchase; I haven't really needed his help with arm-twisting Canon, but I bet he would have more clout if need be. (I bought from Shades of Paper).

Dexter Johnston

[Mark D Segal]

John;

I bet he would have more clout if need be.

Dexter Johnston
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112260\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think the phrase "clout with Canon" is a contradiction of terms.

[jpgentry]

My other thought is it pays to know the dealer from whom you purchase; I haven't really needed his help with arm-twisting Canon, but I bet he would have more clout if need be. (I bought from Shades of Paper).

Dexter Johnston
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112260\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You bought from the right guy.  You have a problem it will be solved with or without the Canon's blessing.

[Avalan]

A few of resellers and suppliers have been a great extra support for us. They have provided all kind of help from providing better generic profiles to replacing defective inks and  in helpful contact with users in many ways.

There is a list of reputable resellers in front page of the Wiki . So far they have been Booksmart studio , Shades of paper , Color HQ , IT supplies and Focus pre-press from Canada. These are the kind of businesses you want to deal with and support , regardless of what kind of printer or consumable you may use. They have been supportive and we will support them by promoting them by all means.