Spectrophotometers: i1photo pro 2, i1 Pro 2, i1studio

[raminolta]

  So far, I have been calibrating my monitor using an i1 Display pro. For papers, I have been using the icc profiles supplied by the paper manufacturers. I have been getting fairing accurate results. I was printing for myself so if there was any slight color inaccuracy, it didn't really bother me much. However like some others (I guess), my major problem wasn't color inaccuracy but prints coming out too dark rather.
  Long story short, I have decided to get a spectrophotometer. First I see talks about i1photo pro 2 and i1pro 2. I am suspecting these are really the same. I just want to make sure this is the case. Next, I see a huge price difference between i1photo pro and i1studio. In fact a used i1photo pro 2 sells for more than twice the price of a new i1studio. I know i1studio make only 50 color patches. Any difference in the result? Speed? Other differences? i1photo pro 3 is too expensive so I am not buying it. Is i1photo pro 2 compatible with latest operating systems such as Windows 10? Is it worth the high price?

I appreciate your feedback.

[NAwlins_Contrarian]

I have been calibrating my monitor using an i1 Display pro.... [M]y major problem wasn't color inaccuracy but prints coming out too dark rather. Long story short, I have decided to get a spectrophotometer.... I appreciate your feedback.

Insofar as your major problem is prints coming out too dark, why don't you simply try setting a lower target when you calibrate and profile your monitor with your i1 Display Pro? E.g., if you're telling the software you want 120 cd/m^2, why don't you try 100 cd/m^2 or even 80 cd/m^2 and see whether that largely solves your major problem?

In a related vein, why are you considering getting a spectrophotometer? How is that going to address your major problem? The best printer profile in the world isn't going to compensate for your monitor being too bright.

All of that said, FWIW:
* the i1Studio is a wholly different device with wholly different X-Rite software. I've rented it, and now I have its predecessor, the ColorMunki Photo. It's fine for my purposes. Of course YMMV. So I suggest maybe you rent one (e.g., https://www.lensrentals.com/rent/x-rite-i1studio-spectrophotometer), and see whether you think it puts you on a helpful course.
* If you feel like the rented i1Studio puts you on a helpful course but you decide you want something more sophisticated, powerful, and flexible, then you can consider the the various i1 Pro 2 and i1 Pro 3 models and their various differences, pros, and cons.
* I seem to recall that maybe the difference between an i1 Pro 2 and i1 Photo Pro 2 may be what X-Rite software / software capabilities they do and don't have. X-Rite sometimes locks out certain software capabilities for otherwise-very-similar hardware, I guess as market segmentation.
* Whether you can a used ColorMunki Photo or the latest new i1 Photo Pro 3, more than a few will think you can do more / better using Argyll CMS instead of the X-Rite software. For an expert that may very well be true. For me, I'm pretty happy with the basic i1Studio software. How deep a dive do you want to take?
* For that matter, how deep a dive does your wallet want to take?

[raminolta]

I am thinking about starting to sell prints to clients so color accuracy will be important in the future.That's why I want to buy a spectrophotometer.

[digitaldog]

I am thinking about starting to sell prints to clients so color accuracy will be important in the future.That's why I want to buy a spectrophotometer.

Then you'll need other tools as well:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jy0BD5aRV9s&feature=youtu.be

Colorimetry and the dE testing is about color perception. It is not about color appearance. The reason why viewing a print is more valid than measuring it is because measurement is about comparing solid colors. Color appearance is about evaluating images and color in context which measurement devices can't provide. Colorimetry is about color perception. It is not about color appearance. Colorimetry was never designed as a color appearance model. It was never designed to even be used as an interchange space between device dependent color models. It's not designed for imagery at all. Colorimetry based on solid  colors in very specific ambient and surround conditions. Anytime one speaks of color accuracy NOT pleasing color, we need a way to define accuracy numerically (otherwise, we're back to subjectivity). That's where colorimetry comes to play. And there are NO rules in how a perceptual rendering from a profile is produced. Just like there are no rules in how E6 rendering (Velvia vs Ektachrome) is produced. The profile maker and film manufacturer produce a rendering they feel their customers might prefer. So how to test profiles with a perceptual rendering? Subjectively with many color reference images (I'd suggest at the very least, the entire suite of Roman 16's).

The ideal tool for display calibration is a Colorimeter:
http://www.lumita.com/site_media/work/whitepapers/files/xrite-wp-3a.pdf