Resurrect iPF 8400 or new PRO-4100?

[TheMatrix]

My iPF 8400 has been stored for a few years in a climate controlled environment. When one of the heads failed, I was unable to keep printing a few test jobs a month to keep things fresh and the ink agitated, and it sat for almost 2 years. A few months ago I powered it up into service mode, and was able to print a nozzle check pattern. After a few cleaning cycles, it reprimed itself, and the patterns were good. I booted into normal mode, and it gave the head failure error again. This is to be expected, as this printer was bought new in 2015 and is still on its factory set of heads.

I am unsure if it is worth buying a new head, and I know almost certainly the other head will go too, if it hasn't already. I see Amazon appears to sell genuine Canon PF-05 heads for $333. Is it worth gambling almost $700 on this old unit? Or should I just look into a new PRO-4100? I know that color accuracy will be off with such old ink, as well as prone to clogs because of pigments settling. But my main concern is hardware failure elsewhere, such as the carriage PCB or the main PCB. If I knew I could pop in two new heads and be good to go, I'd do that, but I am worried I'd just be throwing $700 down the drain if it complains of another error after the heads are replaced.

From my research, I am aware that the new inkset of the "PRO" line has drawbacks, including significantly reduced longevity and reduced gamut in some areas.

Thank you any feedback.

[mcpix]

First, the Canon 8300 and 8400 printers were some of the most reliable printers made. They are comparable to the Epson 7800/9800 series in that they just work and present very few day to day problems. I purchased my 8300 in 2010 and I'm still using it today. I'm not a high volume lab, but I do make 2-8 prints a week. It's been a great machine for me.

Second, as far as replacing the print heads, there is no set time when they go out. It's true that if you run a reasonable volume over many years, you may see a trend (on my machine one print head goes out about a year before the other one), but you never really know when the other head is going to need to be replaced.

So, if it were me, I would buy the new head (more on that later) and see if you can make the machine work. That may be all it takes.

As far as buying a new head, there are a lot of bad sellers on Amazon and eBay selling used or "refurbished" Canon print heads. I would steer clear of all of them. B&H sells new pf-05 heads for $473. If you have a problem with one, you can call Canon directly and from what others have said, they will replace it. I've never had a problem with any new head I purchased.

So, in this case it's a decision between spending $500 vs spending $4000. If it were me, I would spend the $500. Not only is it cheaper, but there are some in this group that would argue that it's a better printer too.

[TheMatrix]

Thank you for the reply, that's what I was hoping to hear. This was the $333 head I mentioned, it says it's from the "Canon Store" but who knows with Amazon. I know how head warranty works normally, but how does it work with Amazon, if at all?

https://www.amazon.com/CANON-IMGPROGRAF-IPF8300-PF05-PRINTHEAD/dp/B00C7LPXN4/ref=mp_s_a_1_3?crid=46FDKYQ6W9HL&keywords=pf-05&qid=1660781370&sprefix=pf-05%2Caps%2C150&sr=8-3

[mearussi]

I own the ipf6400 and have bought two heads from Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/Generic-1634157-PF-05-Druckkopf-Canon/dp/B0036ZZ2NQ/ref=sr_1_3?crid=31913E04ULYS0&keywords=canon+pf-05&qid=1660787573&sprefix=canon+pf-05%2Caps%2C139&sr=8-3&ufe=app_do%3Aamzn1.fos.18630bbb-fcbb-42f8-9767-857e17e03685
and they have both worked fine.
Also I've used nothing but outdated ink (both Canon and Epson) for years without any problems. That's one of the advantages of the older printers, outdated ink for 1/3-1/2 price is usually available.

[Czornyj]

I'm using iPF PRO-4000 since the day it came out and it's the most reliable, trouble free printer I've ever had (Epson SP7880 > iPF6350 > iPF8300 > Pro-4000). PF-10 lasts 5-10x longer than PF-5 (usually well over 30l of ink until failure), and there's no risk that it will damage the main board when it dies (which happened in my iPF8300). The printer is more convenient and economic in use, quality is also noticeably better. I'd switch from iPF8400 to PRO-4100 without a moment of hesitation.

[Richard.Wills]

I'm using iPF PRO-4000 since the day it came out and it's the most reliable, trouble free printer I've ever had (Epson SP7880 > iPF6350 > iPF8300 > Pro-4000). PF-10 lasts 5-10x longer than PF-5 (usually well over 30l of ink until failure), and there's no risk that it will damage the main board when it dies (which happened in my iPF8300). The printer is more convenient and economic in use, quality is also noticeably better. I'd switch from iPF8400 to PRO-4100 without a moment of hesitation.

Hi Marcin,
Interesting you should say that - how're you finding the paper path with thicker media?

[Czornyj]

Hi Marcin,
Interesting you should say that - how're you finding the paper path with thicker media?

The layout of suction holes is redesigned and it works better - I had no issues with thicker (350-500gsm) fine art media

[Richard.Wills]

That's very helpful - I'm hoping that design also follows in the larger 6100.

[Czornyj]

That's very helpful - I'm hoping that design also follows in the larger 6100.

Sure, all iPF PRO have the same suction layout

[deanwork]

The longevity and green gamut sucks on the 4000 compared to the 8400. I’d keep the 8400 unless they plan to
discontinue the inks. Canon has a list of dates of end time for inks and parts. I can’t find my copy to tell you. I’d also compare the prices of the inks. Hp keeps going up on theirs.

On both of those Canons the neutral monochrome is not good at all , the worst of the three brands. Their grays are really bluish requiring a lot of yellow to neutralize. Yellow produces a lot of metameric failure. Even with great profiles and the old Bowhaus software there was nothing that could be done about that. With warm prints it’s far worse, that color shift under different light sources. None of that with Epson or HpZ.

If really bad longevity is not an issue for you ( many people just don’t care and don’t sell prints to be shown in bright public spaces ) and you can live with mediocre green gamut ( landscapes) and don’t do a lot of bw, I’d go with the 4000. It would be the most trouble free option out there .  If they would change out the inkset to equal Epson I’d buy one for sure, right now.

Please, somebody don’t say they have “deep rich blacks”. That’s not how you measure great monochrome. They all have improved dmax now.

John

The layout of suction holes is redesigned and it works better - I had no issues with thicker (350-500gsm) fine art media

[Czornyj]

The longevity and green gamut sucks on the 4000 compared to the 8400. I’d keep the 8400 unless they plan to
discontinue the inks. Canon has a list of dates of end time for inks and parts. I can’t find my copy to tell you. I’d also compare the prices of the inks. Hp keeps going up on theirs.

On both of those Canons the neutral monochrome is not good at all , the worst of the three brands. Their grays are really bluish requiring a lot of yellow to neutralize. Yellow produces a lot of metameric failure. Even with great profiles and the old Bowhaus software there was nothing that could be done about that. With warm prints it’s far worse, that color shift under different light sources. None of that with Epson or HpZ.

If really bad longevity is not an issue for you ( many people just don’t care and don’t sell prints to be shown in bright public spaces ) and you can live with mediocre green gamut ( landscapes) and don’t do a lot of bw, I’d go with the 4000. It would be the most trouble free option out there .  If they would change out the inkset to equal Epson I’d buy one for sure, right now.

Please, somebody don’t say they have “deep rich blacks”. That’s not how you measure great monochrome. They all have improved dmax now.

John

1) longevity sucks, unless there's something wrong with longevity tests, and the longevity test results of iPF PRO are weird to say at least

2) green gamut sucks in jade green area that doesn't even occur in landscapes

3) neutrality is relative

After 6 years with iPF PRO-4000 I wouldn't touch an iPF8400 with a ten-foot pole.

[Rob Reiter]

Why say anything more than I agree with this statement 100%.

I'm using iPF PRO-4000 since the day it came out and it's the most reliable, trouble free printer I've ever had (Epson SP7880 > iPF6350 > iPF8300 > Pro-4000). PF-10 lasts 5-10x longer than PF-5 (usually well over 30l of ink until failure), and there's no risk that it will damage the main board when it dies (which happened in my iPF8300). The printer is more convenient and economic in use, quality is also noticeably better. I'd switch from iPF8400 to PRO-4100 without a moment of hesitation.

[chipc4]

A bit off topic: i have a pro2000 and 2 ink tanks are empty (M&PC for the moment) however I want to print some B&W. Does anyone have ideas how to override the ink tank errors?I can't seem to figure it out- suggestions -like holding stop button for 8 seconds- don't seem to work.
Thanks
chip

[Czornyj]

A bit off topic: i have a pro2000 and 2 ink tanks are empty (M&PC for the moment) however I want to print some B&W. Does anyone have ideas how to override the ink tank errors?I can't seem to figure it out- suggestions -like holding stop button for 8 seconds- don't seem to work.
Thanks
chip

When the cart is completly empty iPF PRO continues to print using ink from retention tank. When the ink level in retention tank is too low it simply won't print. Air causes clogging, and additionaly thermal print head is cooled by ink, so it always prints microscopic amounts of all ink colors to prevent from overheating. The whole system is designed to prevent from getting air into ink lines to avoid clogging and overheating, and it will not let you print when there's not enough ink. You can only try to turn it on and off, it sometimes helps.