Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: Czornyj on December 19, 2016, 11:29:07 am
-
Pretty much confirms my own observations ^_^
http://www.designsupply.co.uk/blipdfs/Canon%20PRO-2000%20vs.%20Epson%20SC-P7000.pdf
http://www.designsupply.co.uk/blipdfs/Canon%20PRO-4000%20vs%20Epson%20SC%20P9000.pdf
-
Thank you for finding & posting that!
-
Think this would apply down model to the 17 inch versions?
-
Think this would apply down model to the 17 inch versions?
The SC-P800 lacks G and O inks, and iPF PRO-1000 may have different maintenance routines than PRO-2000/4000, but overall there are similar trends - PRO-1000 is faster, more economical, doesn't leave any ink in the carts, doesn't waste ink for PK/MK switches, is more convenient in use, and offers better quality on photo papers with CO applied.
-
I note that the comparison was commissioned by Canon. I guess they got their moneys worth.
PS I own a Canon ipf6300 and love it. Just concerned about whether who pays for the study affects the results. In medicine, industry sponsored studies are considered to be a lower level of evidence than if done independently.