Canon has printers that don't waste ink when switching from PK to MK black ink, so why doesn't Epson have this feature? Does Canon own a patent or something? Soon I will be looking to upgrade my Epson 3800 printer, and it would be nice to have this feature. Also, why does Canon have chrome optimizer for debronzing while Epson does not?
Because piëzo nozzles are expensive and thermal nozzles cheap. An extra channel for another black ink counts. It also brings more revenue to the company when users drain some ink to the maintenance tank in the PK>MK>PK cycle. In the past an exchange of MK to PK was even more expensive as the total tube length had to be refilled + additional cleaning steps + a maintenance tank to replace.
Heads for similar speed wide formats;
*HP Z6100, 8 channel = 4 heads, user replaceable for $536, 8.5K nozzles
*Canon iPF, 12 channel = 2 heads, user replaceable for $800, 30.7K nozzles
*Epson 9900, 10 channel = 1 head, for $1300, service man needed, 3.6K nozzles
*half the speed of the above;
HP Z3200, 12 channel = 6 heads, user replaceable for $444, 12.6K nozzles
Epson had a gloss optimiser in the R1800/800 R1900/900 models. More brands used it, HP-Canon-Kodak, but not on all models. My best guess is that it gave more freedom on the pigment load of the normal inks when a gloss enhancer is used but I expect that progress in ink development makes it no longer necessary. The Canon iPF9400 inks have a better gloss than for example the iPF9100, a generation older printer.
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernsthttp://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2012, 500+ inkjet media white spectral plots.