Topic: Z3100 new user experience (Read 3281 times)

caddy · « **on:** October 03, 2007, 04:18:22 pm »

Last year, I kept a little diary of my experiences with the HP B9180. It still gets a ton of traffic and folks tell me they really appreciated the info, so I'm going to repeat with the Z3100. Hopefully, it will turn out better this time

http://www.cliffaddy.com/z3100.html

chilehead · « **Reply #1 on:** October 03, 2007, 04:22:56 pm »

Man. You are a glutton for punishment!

Looking forward to the diary.

Mark

John Hollenberg · « **Reply #2 on:** October 03, 2007, 05:28:27 pm »

I am as critical of Canon as anyone in certain areas, but in my opinion this statement in your diary is completely inaccurate:

"Also, I had just finished evaluating the new Canon iPF6100 and was very disappointed in the output quality, really bad GD and bronzing plus many reports of printer failures, warranty weaseling, and really bad support from Canon."

I would consider the bronzing a problem with the iPF5000, but the new black inks virtually resolve the problem for neutral colors. There is still some bronzing reported for dark colors that aren't black, but I am not sure how much of a problem it is. Also, there have been very FEW reports of printer failures, but many reports of roll feed unit failures on the iPF5000. This almost certainly won't be a problem with the iPFX100 series, as the problem was fixed by Canon by adding a new part.

The "warranty weasling" has been resolved in the US, Canon USA has been very good in the last 4-5 months at replacing defective ink cartridges, etc. I would not characterize the current support as "really bad". There are a few problems with web site not up to date and a few other unresolved issues, but no showstoppers (in my opinion).

Your description mixes in the old (and mostly resolved) issues of the iPF5000 with the new generation. Lumping the iPF6100 in with the problems experienced by the early iPF5000 users is unfair and inaccurate.

For a more objective report of current problems, see:

http://canonipf5000.wikispaces.com/Conside...ng+This+Printer

--John

John Camp · « **Reply #3 on:** October 03, 2007, 06:28:05 pm »

It would be nice if you could get this diary in the Wiki, so we wouldn't have to find it on this list...unless we could agree to bump it a couple times a day.

JC

John Hollenberg · « **Reply #4 on:** October 03, 2007, 07:28:47 pm »

Quote

It would be nice if you could get this diary in the Wiki, so we wouldn't have to find it on this list...unless we could agree to bump it a couple times a day.

I just added it to the Z3100 Wiki "Printer Reviews" page.

--John

caddy · « **Reply #5 on:** October 04, 2007, 07:46:04 am »

Quote

I am as critical of Canon as anyone in certain areas, but in my opinion this statement in your diary is completely inaccurate

Sorry, it wasn't a very well constructed sentence. The second part about warranties and failures was meant to address Canon's history in general. I've rewritten that section to be clearer, if not more complementary.

I do have to disagree with you about the bronzing, tho. The test prints I got had really bad bronzing in most of the mid-tones, especially skin. It looks like gasoline floating on water.

Cliff

John Hollenberg · « **Reply #6 on:** October 04, 2007, 09:09:00 am »

Quote

I do have to disagree with you about the bronzing, tho. The test prints I got had really bad bronzing in most of the mid-tones, especially skin. It looks like gasoline floating on water.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=143779\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Are you sure these were with the iPFX100 inkset? This is very surprising to me. I have only viewed a couple of iPF5100 prints, but they looked great. Wonder why the discrepancy.

--John

SeanPuckett · « **Reply #7 on:** October 04, 2007, 12:19:10 pm »

caddy -- my studio is two flights up, one flight with a switchback landing, the last flight being no more than 28 inches wide (house built circa 1928) -- and I got a 44" z3100 up without killing myself, my wife, or the printer.

The method is to take it up in pieces and treat the printer itself like a refrigerator, which when you leave the big styro ends on the printer body, it resembles. Use a strap clamp to hold it vertically to an appliance dolly and yoink it up the stairs -- use an assistant to keep from killing yourself. This works because, until the printer is charged with ink, you won't kill it by turning it every-which-way.

Getting it back DOWN the stairs when I move into my off-site studio will be ... interesting. At least it is down, and not up...

(Oh, yeah, and the thought "but i don't *have* an appliance dolly" is addressed by purchasing one. What's a hundred dollars of insurance to protect your back and a $4k (in my case $7k) machine?)

klocke · « **Reply #8 on:** October 04, 2007, 01:34:07 pm »

Caddy,

thanks for the contribution,
you write regarding the IPF6100:

>the test prints I got had really bad bronzing in most of the mid-tones, especially skin.
>It looks like gasoline floating on water.

That sounds like wrong paper/ink combination or wrong driver settings for printing. Anyway seems in the same class as your first HP prints. Such bad bronzing I have only seen with dye ink on not matching paper.

Two questions:
1. Did you do something special to ensure you will get a printer with the updated paper transport design? Or do you assume that a printer delivered now has the new assembly?

2. In particular for portraits I value "color constancy" or lack of metamerism very high, in fact much highter than gloss differential. Did you evaluate your test prints specifically for that as well.

Regards,
Stefan

Scott Martin · « **Reply #9 on:** October 04, 2007, 02:29:09 pm »

Canon's inks in the x000 series printers have bronzing characteristics that are very similar to Epson's K3 inks. Canon's x100 inks are the same except for the blacks which have dramatically reduced bronzing. So you really see this when you compare black and white "monochrome photos" mode prints between the x000 and x100 printers. The x100 black and white prints are fantastic (extremely low bronzing) and make the x000, Z series and Epson's K3 Advanced Black and White mode prints look bad. Color prints on the x100 printers don't show as much reduced bronzing because color prints use a lot of color inks which of course haven't been improved since the last generation. For color prints, HP's GE is a good solution.

It's also worth noting that the paper one chooses to print on influences the bronzing effect. Harman's Gloss FB AL can show tons of bronzing in comparison to the same print made on the same printer with the same settings on Hahnemuhle Fine Art Pearl, which is far less prone to bronzing. So when we do our bronzing comparisons we must be sure to do them all on the same paper (or group of testing papers).

When looking at black and white prints from all kinds of printers the Canon x100 prints stand out. They have the best constancy and appearance of neutrality, IMO. Again I used to think my K3 ABW black and white prints were gorgeous until I saw these. It's funny how that works. Now I'm ruined for the quality of x1000 black and white prints. The new 32 passes mode resolves lots of very fine detail. What I haven't had a chance to do yet is print some resolution targets at say 300, 320, 340, 360, 380, 400ppi and see what the effective resolving resolution is on these printers. If anyone has a chance to do that I'd love to hear about it.

Author Topic: Z3100 new user experience (Read 3281 times)