Leaving aside print longevity how the Canons (1000/4000) compare to the HPs (Z3200/Z9+) on print output quality in color and BW? I have the 1000 and the 4000 but if the HP Z9+ is much better I maybe buy one in the future.
Thanks!
Panagiotis
Because the Z9+ does away with LC, LM, and LLK inks, I am also very curious about initial print quality on the New Z9+ compared to my older Z3200 and also compared to my Pro-4000, also my smaller Pro-1000 and Epson SC P600 desktop printers. I've only taken a very brief look at this issue so far because I have only had the Z9+ running for a few days now. IMHO, for 99% of viewers looking at prints from these different printers at a rational (i.e. normal) viewing distance, the Image quality is excellent from all of them and in high quality printing mode, the observer does not see grain. Most printing experts I suspect will say you can't go wrong purchasing any one of them if your purchase is being determined solely by print output under "best quality" mode printing conditions.
I do plan to take a more serious look as to how we can better objectively quantify the question you are asking. Are there subtle differences where a very discerning viewer might like one printer's output over another, and would that be all the time or just for some specific imaging situations like skin tone reproduction or B&W printing? Not trying to sidestep the question in any way, but in truth, at that level of viewer sophistication, it gets complicated! How inkjet printer screening patterns and dot structures on the paper translate into the visual perception of a continuous tone print at normal viewing distances is a multifaceted issue. For example, the Iris 3047 which ushered in the Digital Fineart printmaking era, had a distinct yet precisely ordered dot structure which is unmistakeable when viewed with an 8x loupe, but at normal viewing distance Iris prints have a gorgeous continuous tone appearance that many collectors really prize.
That said, there's another reason to consider printer dot structure and screening patterns: prints sometime end up being the source original needing to be scanned because the camera source original cannot be found, and in that situation dot structure under higher magnification does play a greater role in scanned output quality.
I can say already that under higher magnification the HP Z9+ begins to show a little more noticeable grain structure overall while the Epson and Canon printers are a little smoother overall, but the Z9+ shows more uniformly pleasing grain throughout the printed color range, whereas, for example, my Canon Pro-1000 exhibits more color noise variation throughout the printed color range. Again. it's complicated.
In full color mode, the Canons and Epsons also reveal obvious color dots in the neutral RGB triplet colors whereas the HP is dead-on photo gray ink only. Those of us with HP Z3200's already know what this means for superior B&W printing, especially when printing in full color mode. The Z9+ continues in the tradition of the Z3200 with a 100% gray component replacement (GCR) method for printing RGB neutral triplets. Canon and Epson apply GCR much less aggressively. It may well be that a focus group being presented blind coded prints of a variety of subjects and being asked to do a paired comparison or rank order type of evaluation may be the only type of study printmakers would accept as a valid answer to your question. Those types of studies take time and money!
Let me close this longwinded comment by telling you my single biggest impression about the Z9+ to date. HP has built into this printer the easiest most effective color calibration/profiling routine I have ever used. Using only 464 patches for color profiling this printer's output rivals the results from my best proflling kit using much higher patch count. The underlying printer calibration/lineariation is so good, that bigger patch counts are definitely in the realm of very diminishing returns. Why HP marketing has so downplayed the on board spectrophotometer and color calibration/profling capability of the Z9+ in their marketing brochures is anybody's guess. Maybe they think color management scares people in general away from buying printers. I think HP marketing should be shouting this capability from the roof top, because for the majority of photographers and printmakers who are not and probably don't want to be color management geeks, the Z9+ handles all that color complexity with sheer elegance and grace
cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com