I'll chime in as a user of the Epson p900. I had the same choice to make a while ago. I guess my reasons for the Epson were that I wanted to use roll paper, and that I'd heard so much about the amount ink the Canon uses. Also, I had read that the Canon heads are replaceable but more likely to need replacing. Like you, we all do our "research" in these forums and it can be tough to tell what is true, normal, or just a rant. Because you can get a bad unit from any mfg. In fact, mine was replaced under warranty already. If you need customer support, it could be great or terrible. I've had both experiences and found that it matters who you get on the phone and that a little persistence pays off. That said, I'll probably purchase an additional year of warranty coverage.
I certainly won't bash Canon, they make good products. I've had a Pixma 8120 desktop scanner/printer for 10 years and it works as flawlessly now as it did when I bought it.
One possible advantage to the Canon is the vacuum system. In my Epson, sometimes the head will brush against the paper at the start and/or end of the print. This is because the paper lifts some when it is not supported by both sets of feed rollers. You can raise the head a little or you can add about an inch and a half of unprinted paper to accommodate the scuffs so they don't land in the image area. This is more painful to do with sheet paper, but no issue with roll paper that the Epson does. Anyway, even with sheets, I cannot say that the number of times this has happened has made me question my purchase. With the Canon not supporting roll paper, the vacuum feature is maybe more necessary.
My main goal for print quality was to get the best b&w on Baryta style papers, and I tell you as a long time wet darkroom printer, the quality I get from the Epson is nothing short of spectacular. The ABW mode works great, but I make custom profiles good enough to not need it, my b&w comes out perfect.
Build quality is... eh, fine. These are for casual users that are gentle with their equipment. Not commercial use. You can tell lots of cost engineering went into to the design. But, everything consumers buy these days is disposable.
Ink cost.. fine. I don't care too much about that, paper is the main expense.
Paper feed has been fine for me. This tends to be a hot button issue for people and experiences vary. Mine works well, no complaints.
Clogging seems to be a thing of the past. I go a few weeks maybe and never worry about it. If I were going months, then I probably would not buy a printer anyway.
Cleaning cycles that waste ink... Seems like hardly ever, which is not something reported about the Canon.
Gamut... you can do your research but I've never seen a study that showed a significant and usable difference to me. It's always less than your monitor anyway.
Dmax... I print at 1440x1440 with black enhance on, and get a maximum density of about 2.5. Wished I had that in the darkroom! Going to 5760 dpi can get the dmax to 2.7, but it's not worth the extended printing times or the heavy corrections needed to fix the crushed blacks.