Educated Speculation

[arobinson7547]

I'm going to buy a used IPF-9400, instead of a New Pro-6000. It's a better fit for my needs and will a little less than half the cost.

Meanwhile, I'm going to hold out for a 60 to 64 inch Epson P9570 (same type specs/ink in a 60ish size)

Do YOU [Educated Speculator] think Epson will do this?

[deanwork]

No, the 11880 was around forever and the P2000 is pretty much using the same inks, same speed, new big heads etc  but has an additional dark gray so I’d rather have it anyway. The gamut and speed should be comparable. As to how they will all pan out in regard to clogging and durability of heads, only time will tell.

I think you made the right decision anyway.

I'm going to buy a used IPF-9400, instead of a New Pro-6000. It's a better fit for my needs and will a little less than half the cost.

Meanwhile, I'm going to hold out for a 60 to 64 inch Epson P9570 (same type specs/ink in a 60ish size)

Do YOU [Educated Speculator] think Epson will do this?

[NAwlins_Contrarian]

I agree with Deanwork.
* From a technology standpoint--especially (1) the larger heads (2) that have separate photo black ink and matte black ink channels (3) to print with "UltraChrome Pro" series inks--the P9570 and P7570 seem most closely related to, and modest developments of, the P20000 (and its sibling the P10000). In other words, arguably the P20000 is the leader of the current generation, which also includes the P9570, P7570, P900, and P700. (IIRC, the P10000 is being discontinued as largely redundant of the P9570.)
* The P20000 is barely four years old; the predecessor 11880 was the current model for more than eight years. I doubt Epson sells enough of these to want to change the models more often than it has to.

On the Canon side, just FWIW and as potential food for thought:
* the Pro-6100 replaced the Pro-6000 more than nine months ago; how readily can you even get a new Pro-6000?
* A new Pro-6100 would come with $2076 of ink (12 cartridges, 330 ml each, cost $173 each); how much ink comes with the used iPF9400 you're considering?
To be clear, I'm not saying that you should get a Pro-6100 instead of an iPF9400, only that in addition to deciding what's an appropriate discount for a used printer that's at least three and potentially as much as eight years old, any used printer buying decision should account for the value of the ink it includes, and the value of ink the corresponding new printer would include.

[deanwork]

He’s right, the value of the inks and how long the printheads have been in there are big considerations and should effect how much you pay. They likely just want to get the thing out of their space.  Also the permanence of the pigments in the newer Canon  units have changed, and not in a good way.

The reason there are not an abundance of 60 “ aqueous printers coming to market ( hp has never had one ) is the majority of companies use this size for signage and  prefer latex or eco solvent units for that ( big seller for hp, Epson, and Canon ) .  A lot of us “ fine art” guys don’t even have room to handle these print sizes in a practical way, so they are kind of a niche market in my opinion.

John

I agree with Deanwork.
* From a technology standpoint--especially (1) the larger heads (2) that have separate photo black ink and matte black ink channels (3) to print with "UltraChrome Pro" series inks--the P9570 and P7570 seem most closely related to, and modest developments of, the P20000 (and its sibling the P10000). In other words, arguably the P20000 is the leader of the current generation, which also includes the P9570, P7570, P900, and P700. (IIRC, the P10000 is being discontinued as largely redundant of the P9570.)
* The P20000 is barely four years old; the predecessor 11880 was the current model for more than eight years. I doubt Epson sells enough of these to want to change the models more often than it has to.

On the Canon side, just FWIW and as potential food for thought:
* the Pro-6100 replaced the Pro-6000 more than nine months ago; how readily can you even get a new Pro-6000?
* A new Pro-6100 would come with $2076 of ink (12 cartridges, 330 ml each, cost $173 each); how much ink comes with the used iPF9400 you're considering?
To be clear, I'm not saying that you should get a Pro-6100 instead of an iPF9400, only that in addition to deciding what's an appropriate discount for a used printer that's at least three and potentially as much as eight years old, any used printer buying decision should account for the value of the ink it includes, and the value of ink the corresponding new printer would include.

[arobinson7547]

Funny you should say that. The guy with the Printer brought a 9400 when we NEEDED a Latex. So brand you (with ink and heads installed) he put it in the corner and purchased an HP Latex 360. A little than years ago I went past turned it on watch the printer do One cleaning and print a Perfect nozzle test. He said he paid 7 and wanted 5; I offered 3. He was going to take it BUT the Wife said no.

Talked to him yesterday he still has it. I'm going to go and check it again and offer the same $3,000. He's motivated to sell, this time.

I would have opted for the zero lease of the PRO 6000 at about 7 (currently), instead of the new machine premium of the PRO 6100

I've been hooked on CMYKOGV since Roland had the CMYKLcLmOG in their Hi-Fi Jet Pro 500 (that was sorta the first amazing 'Fine Art' machine.

CMYKLcLmLkLLkOGV (with Photo and Matte K). It ain't EVER gonna get any better than that.

My put off on the 20000 is I noticed a third party rip setting that explained, If you needed to print in 'Fine Art' mode (detail accuracy) they would be disabling on of the heads. Which I interpreted as the two heads give you SPEEED, yea. But and the cost of accuracy and precision. That was enough to make me think they weren't 'quite' there, yet.

One thing that roland aqueous printers had is a killer manual head alignment for single AND bi-directional Printing. They REALLY let you dial it in (you had to be in Service Mode)

60 inches gets you into indoor commercial work without committing to the constant printing demands of the Surecolor s40 (you buy that and it won't be happy sitting around not doing anything like the 8300/8400 (and hp Z3200)

He’s right, the value of the inks and how long the printheads have been in there are big considerations and should effect how much you pay. They likely just want to get the thing out of their space.  Also the permanence of the pigments in the newer Canon  units have changed, and not in a good way.

The reason there are not an abundance of 60 “ aqueous printers coming to market ( hp has never had one ) is the majority of companies use this size for signage and  prefer latex or eco solvent units for that ( big seller for hp, Epson, and Canon ) .  A lot of us “ fine art” guys don’t even have room to handle these print sizes in a practical way, so they are kind of a niche market in my opinion.

John

[MfAlab]

I think that will never be a 64" version of P9570. According to the product line history, new 64" printer is on the next generation.

 7800  /  9800
 7880  /  9880  / 11880   --> no change on 24"/44" hardware, a little change on ink (Magenta), 64" model use new head
 7900  /  9900                --> massive change on hardware, add new ink (Orange/Green), use previous 64" head, no new 64" model
P7000 / P9000 / P20000  --> no change on 24"/44" hardware, a little change on ink (Black/Yellow), 64" model use new head
P7570 / P9570                --> massive change on hardware, add new ink (Violet), use previous 64" head, no new 64" model

Maybe P9000/P10000 models is a market test, to find out people wants vivid color or high production volume. P9000 can choose OGV set of inks for wide gamut. P10000 has smaller gamut but high volume. It is a confusion time, but if we ignore P9000's Violet option and P10000 model, things are all going on the track, except P20000 has no OG inks.

I guess the Epson next generation printers would be like that:
P7XXX / P9XXX / P2XXXX --> 24"/44" have the same hardware with P7570/P9570, a little change on ink (maybe Cyan), 64" model use new head (maybe 1200 nozzles/channel)
But it will be in the long future since we are facing economic crisis because COVID-19.

[Lessbones]

In my experience and in talking to Epson mgmt, they basically use the 64" platform to test new technologies.  So much like the 11880 then trickled down tech into the 79/9900, the p20000 tech is now in the 24" and 44" models.  There is only one print head in these machines, so there is no disabling of any head involved when switching to 2400x1200 dpi  -- it still operates quite fast in comparison to the 2880 dpi modes of older models.

HP has almost always had 64" models-- I had a z6800 for a little while, and it was totally a decent and usable machine, but it was quite slow at the higher quality modes.  Paper loading was also kind of an insane system imo, but it was very well built.  I've got an IPF-9400, PRO6000 + 4000, and a p20000 here, and while they're all good machines, I still have a soft spot for the 9400.  The operation was designed by different engineers (apparently they then switched over to the same engineers who designed the user interfaces for the smaller desktop consumer printers afterwards) so it feels quicker and more responsive.  The heads for the 9400 are super cheap now compared with what they used to be (i think i saw them for $300 a piece on ebay recently) and the inks last longer than the new ones, so I think you'd be well served there.

The dual roll system on the PRO series is amazing when it works-- I've heard it's greatly improved in the x100 models.

If I could only pick one I'd go for the 9400.  Obviously if you need 64", Epson is your only option.  Also, the matte-black printing on the p20000 is simply amazing.  But overall, there's still a hell of a lot of the constant clogging and cleaning and ink-wasting on the Epson, but the head tech is incredible, it's amazingly fast, and I wouldn't hold my breath for another model in that size for at least another 5+ years.

[arobinson7547]

Lessbones,

Yea, the 9400 really tips the scale for me, too. What REALLY funny is all the things I'm liking about the new Epson, Canon ALREADY had a LONG time ago (back to the 9000). So, I was quite pleased to see the 'consolidation' of features' in the Epsons, but it certainly ain't new. I guess it's the this/or this thing; when they should just put in all one machine (same class of machine), from the get-go. I did not know the 11880's tech had trickled down [to the others]. That was an interesting tidbit.

Epson makes great Printers but it seems like there are just TOO many trade offs. And it just does NOT have to be that way. Choices are NOT the same as trade-offs.