Down to Z3200PS or Pro4000

[Jswanson]

Hello,

 I am looking to order a 44" printer soon in October. I have read a lot on this forum and a few others. I have narrowed my research to these two printers and interested in reading any thoughts you are willing to share.

 I plan to print on metallic paper such as BC metallic and canvas's. I do a decent amount of astro-landscape images, landscapes in general and a B&W now and then. Plan to mostly print from rolls and will be swapping rolls before finished.

 The reason I am between the Canon Pro4000 and HP Z3200PS is because I do work out of the US 8 months of the year. I know these printers call for routine printing which I will not be able to meet. My thinking is these both have user replaceable heads so should be able to make repairs if needed. I calculated and the printer will pay for itself around 29 large prints compared to ordering through Bayphoto as I have been. Which will happen while I am home before it's first long term no use.

 What are your thoughts? I was leaning towards the Canon but after reading some on the Z3200PS I am unsure now. Of the opinion I will love either one but curious to hear your opinion if willing to share.

Thank you,

Josh


 

[Landscapes]

I have a Canon iPF6400, so not exactly what you're comparing to, but similar.  Based on my experience, the Canon is a wonderful printer if used several times per week.  It needs to print in order to stay well maintained.  If you don't print and leave it on, it might be good enough, but I think it will be dumping a good bit of ink in the process.  I honestly even cringe at a 12-14ml clean cycle if I miss not printing for a few days.

From what I read, the HP can be off for a long time and pick up exactly where it left off.  Also keep in mind the heads for the Canon are very expensive compared to the HP. Also, if you do have to replace the head, I imagine the ink dumping for the 4000 will be quite drastic, as in losing hundreds of dollars in ink just to re-prime the new printhead.

I have no direct experience with printing on metallic, nor how the HP inks handle metallic or canvas.  But strictly from a user experience point of view, a sitting printer will be a nightmare, other than the HP perhaps which seems to handle this well.

[mearussi]

http://www.on-sight.com/canon-x300-printer-review/

An old review but the gamut diagrams clearly show the Canon being superior to the HP in printing the dark colors and tones so prominent in night sky photography.

[Jswanson]

 Also, if you do have to replace the head, I imagine the ink dumping for the 4000 will be quite drastic, as in losing hundreds of dollars in ink just to re-prime the new printhead.

 Thank you, much appreciated. I have taken the print head cost into account but not the ink if it does dump all the tanks. Reading the head replacement steps it is vague in what happens with ink tanks etc. It didn't state needing a new ink set least but does it?

 Just read that HP pulled a utility from their website and is now a web based click. I am not certain what that means but seems my choice may be left to the Canon.

 Thank you Mearussi for the link.

[Landscapes]

Thank you, much appreciated. I have taken the print head cost into account but not the ink if it does dump all the tanks. Reading the head replacement steps it is vague in what happens with ink tanks etc. It didn't state needing a new ink set least but does it?

 Just read that HP pulled a utility from their website and is now a web based click. I am not certain what that means but seems my choice may be left to the Canon.

 Thank you Mearussi for the link.

For my 6400, I think it was about 100mL or so of ink lost to replace one head.  Luckily, it only drains the 6 inks that connect to the one head, but you of course will usually have to change both close together.  Now the 4000 does have just one head now, so the head is cheaper than buying 2, but given the extra tubing for the bigger version, I imagine you're going to use several hundred ml's of ink.  Of course this isn't something you will have to do often, but anytime you don't use it for a week, it will do clean cycles whether you like it or not.  If you do go away for months at a time, it might be a heavy clean cycle, like 50-100ml, but if all turns out well, then maybe its just the cost of doing business.

It is unfortunate that the HP is old and I would hate to be in your position having to make this choice.  The Canon probably is better in almost every way, but every HP owner says how it just doesn't clog, and this seems to be your one huge factor since you will be away for so long.  Owning a large format printer can really be a curse which isn't worth it if you don't use it enough, so make sure that you really do need it before you go down this road.

[Czornyj]

For my 6400, I think it was about 100mL or so of ink lost to replace one head.  Luckily, it only drains the 6 inks that connect to the one head, but you of course will usually have to change both close together.  Now the 4000 does have just one head now, so the head is cheaper than buying 2, but given the extra tubing for the bigger version, I imagine you're going to use several hundred ml's of ink.  Of course this isn't something you will have to do often, but anytime you don't use it for a week, it will do clean cycles whether you like it or not.  If you do go away for months at a time, it might be a heavy clean cycle, like 50-100ml, but if all turns out well, then maybe its just the cost of doing business.

After over a year of using PRO-4000 I replaced maintenance tank, and weighted empty and full one. The difference was 426g, the weight of 1ml of ink is ~1,1g, so I assume that the amount of ink used for priming and >1 year of maintanance was 387ml of ink. During that time I used 24 x 160ml carts, 1 x 700ml cart of PBK, and ~1400ml of current full set of 700ml carts, 6l of ink in total. So right now the amount of ink used for priming and maintenance of printhead is ~6,5%. The PF-10 usually lasts for 8-10l of ink on average, so I assume, that the total amount of ink used for priming and maintenance should not exceed 5%.

[Panagiotis]

After over a year of using PRO-4000 I replaced maintenance tank, and weighted empty and full one. The difference was 426g, the weight of 1ml of ink is ~1,1g, so I assume that the amount of ink used for priming and >1 year of maintanance was 387ml of ink. During that time I used 24 x 160ml carts, 1 x 700ml cart of PBK, and ~1400ml of current full set of 700ml carts, 6l of ink in total. So right now the amount of ink used for priming and maintenance of printhead is ~6,5%. The PF-10 usually lasts for 8-10l of ink on average, so I assume, that the total amount of ink used for priming and maintenance should not exceed 5%.

Very interesting information. Can you please report when you changed the maintenance tank how many ml of ink actually used for printing (ended on paper according to accounting manager software?) and how many square feet were actually printed?. I ask this because 6.5% for maintenance sounds very low. For the pro-1000 I use i get something close to 50%. Are these two printers with the same printhead and inkset so different in this regard?
Also I find very interesting your comment about the PF-10 lifetime. Is this somewhat official and is it also apply to pro-1000? Thanks!

[deanwork]

Do not buy any HP until we find out if they are going to honor their obligation to support their Utility software into the present and future! Make no mistake about it, the Utility software IS the Z3200 printer. Without that it is a relic.
 
As a 10 year loyal customer of this system my recommendation is don't trust what they say, trust what they do. There are things I like better on the amazing Z printers than the Canon and certainly the ink wasting Epsons, but I do not trust the people who sell this system to keep up with the current drivers and firmware needed to use them in a professional and practical way. I'm not talking about legacy printers, I'm talking about printers they are selling right now!

Call Hp and ask them what they are going to do about the Utility.



quote author=Panagiotis link=topic=120755.msg1002030#msg1002030 date=1506505882]
Very interesting information. Can you please report when you changed the maintenance tank how many ml of ink actually used for printing (ended on paper according to accounting manager software?) and how many square feet were actually printed?. I ask this because 6.5% for maintenance sounds very low. For the pro-1000 I use i get something close to 50%. Are these two printers with the same printhead and inkset so different in this regard?
Also I find very interesting your comment about the PF-10 lifetime. Is this somewhat official and is it also apply to pro-1000? Thanks!
[/quote]

[Czornyj]

Very interesting information. Can you please report when you changed the maintenance tank how many ml of ink actually used for printing (ended on paper according to accounting manager software?) and how many square feet were actually printed?. I ask this because 6.5% for maintenance sounds very low. For the pro-1000 I use i get something close to 50%. Are these two printers with the same printhead and inkset so different in this regard?
Also I find very interesting your comment about the PF-10 lifetime. Is this somewhat official and is it also apply to pro-1000? Thanks!

I printed 851sqm, about 4 liters were used for printing. I often printed with empty carts to finish jobs using the ink from retention carts, so after installing new cart a lot of ink was used to refill them (there's well over 1l of ink in retention tanks, ink tubes and print head). Many of my customers use PRO-series, so the 8-10l lifetime is from their experience (they're producing large exhibitions and covers for photobooks, so they print a lot).

PRO-1000 uses the same inkset and print head, but it's a whole different beast, and there were some problems regarding ink wasted for maintenance in this model. Updating firmware usually should help in such cases.

[Panagiotis]

I printed 851sqm, about 4 liters were used for printing. I often printed with empty carts to finish jobs using the ink from retention carts, so after installing new cart a lot of ink was used to refill them (there's well over 1l of ink in retention tanks, ink tubes and print head). Many of my customers use PRO-series, so the 8-10l lifetime is from their experience (they're producing large exhibitions and covers for photobooks, so they print a lot).

PRO-1000 uses the same inkset and print head, but it's a whole different beast, and there were some problems regarding ink wasted for maintenance in this model. Updating firmware usually should help in such cases.

Thanks. It seems that pro-1000 is indeed different in ink consumption. Even with the latest firmware the ink ending in the maintenance tank is a lot more than that you report. Maybe ink consumption depends on how much you print and I don't print as much as you do. Anyway I appreciate the info about the life of the PF-10 printhead. Thanks again.

[Jswanson]

 Thank you all for the assistance in making a decision. I pulled the trigger and due Monday morning is a Canon Pro4000. I ordered through itsupplies.com as they listed it shipping with 330ml inks sets.

 Again thank you all for the help, looking forward to setting this up next week and doing some printing.