Canon and Epson 17" printers

[BobDavid]

I currently use an Epson 7890. It's a fine printer. It rarely clogs--I live in Florida.  I am interested in downsizing to a 17" printer. How do the latest generation Epson and Canon printers compare to the 7890?

Of the two, Canon Prograph Pro-1000 vs Epson SureColor P5000 Standard Edition, which has the best output and is the least prone to maintenance issues. It is possible that I will be moving to Colorado, where the humidity is low.

I am aware that the Canon does not accommodate rolls. That is a disadvantage. I am also ambivalent about the gloss optimizer. ... As for dynamic range, overall print quality, and ergonomics, which of the two is the better choice?

I mostly use Hahnamuhle Photo Rag Baryta, Epson Premium Luster, and the RC version of Hahnamuhle Photo Pearl.

I have a decent reserve of Epson Natural Hot Press rag. I rarely print MK. However, I may start using it more if the latest generation of printers produce significantly better output.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Bob,

I believe Mark Segal has a review on LuLa of the latest Canon and Epson printers in that size in which he discusses the pros and cons of each with good clarity.

My experience with Epson (200, then 3800, and now P800) combined with what I've read about the bigger Epsons suggest that the 17" size Epsons are very reliable and  excellent printers, and surely more trouble-free than, for instance, many 4900s. I love my P800, but I have no experience with Canons (except cameras).

I also use PK ink virtually exclusively.

-Eric

P.S. My own essay on making a photo book is now up on LuLa.

[Mark D Segal]

Hi Bob,

We haven't reviewed the SCP-5000 yet - it is awaiting availability of a review unit from Epson, nor have I seen other in-depth reviews of this printer on the Internet to date. I hope within several weeks this gap will be filled. We will be most unlikely to say anything about SCP-5000 clogging because we won't have the unit long enough before publication for such issues to show-up in any meaningful way. Based on my initial look at the OEM profiles for the SCP-5000 (extracted from the downloaded Epson driver), gamut volumes for equivalent or near-equivalent papers are larger than for the Canon Pro-1000 or Epson SCP-800, but how much practical difference this makes to real photographs for the SCP-5000 remains to be evaluated in the course of the review. Having used both the Pro-1000 and SCP-800 for some time now here in Toronto with ambient humidity in the range of 20%~30%, I can attest that clogging is not a problem with either of them.

[Mark D Segal]

................

-Eric

P.S. My own essay on making a photo book is now up on LuLa.

I had previously bought a copy of Eric's book and now read his essay. The essay is fine, and the book is excellent. Eric has true photographic vision, superb craftsmanship and the printing quality of the book is really very good. I highly recommend it.

[BobDavid]

Bob,

I believe Mark Segal has a review on LuLa of the latest Canon and Epson printers in that size in which he discusses the pros and cons of each with good clarity.

My experience with Epson (200, then 3800, and now P800) combined with what I've read about the bigger Epsons suggest that the 17" size Epsons are very reliable and  excellent printers, and surely more trouble-free than, for instance, many 4900s. I love my P800, but I have no experience with Canons (except cameras).

I also use PK ink virtually exclusively.

-Eric

P.S. My own essay on making a photo book is now up on LuLa.

I'll check it out. I have aspirations of making a photo book and know absolutely zilch on the subject.

[keithcooper]

Still waiting for a P5000 here too... Talking with Epson UK, I wasn't really expecting to see one until April/May anyway.

I'll be giving it the same style of testing/review that I did for the P7000 / PRO-1000 / PRO-2000 - the house authorities have been pre-warned to expect the delivery of another printer ;-)

From a print POV I'm expecting to see very similar results to the P7000

We're at a point where separating them on print quality alone is a tricky prospect - all are good enough for me to say that if you can't make a stunning looking print, then the problem is almost certainly not with the printer, but your own skills ;-)

I was at 'The Photography Show' in the UK recently doing talks about making large prints, where Innova provided me with a PRO-4000 (and as much paper as I needed!!)
Someone asked me about the Epson P7000 wrt print 'quality' and I noted that if I had both printers set up, producing the same prints (under show conditions) then I'd only have a slightly better chance than 50/50 of saying which was which with most images, unless I'd marked them in some way.

BTW Thanks to anyone who showed up at the show and said hello - I was rather busier than I'd expected and a bit rushed at times