The Epson has a very good gamut all around, and touches areas in the shadows that both HP and Canon cannot. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=192827\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
With what profiles? I haven't quite found that to be true. I have found the Canon's to be a champ in the shadows and the Z series to be the clear loser in this area.
Here's a test for everyone. Start with a good evaluation image with a granger rainbow, solid color ramps, skin tones, low key imagery and preferably a fall colors shot. Make a set of evaluation prints made both with RelCol and Perceptual using each manufacturer's profiles on the same paper on each printer. Then profile all three brand of printers with the same profiling technology (which necessary for a fair comparison of the inksets). And then make another set of prints on each printer using the same paper with both RelCol and Perceptual.
You'll notice that the RelCol prints show you exactly what the gamut plots indicate. But the Perceptual prints are a different story. If you use ColorVision, PMP Logo Colorful or MP sat+50 profiles you'll see considerably more apparent saturation in the granger rainbow and solid color patches (like R=0 G=255 B=0). You may also notice that the Peceptual prints may *directly contradict* what the gamut plots suggest. The gamut plot may suggest that Epson has the green advantage for example but 10 out of 10 photographers will agree (and I have done such a blind test) that Canon's produce the more desirable and visually saturated green when printed with perceptual using profiles made from the above applications.
I have found Canon to have the advantage for deep greens and blues over the other brands when printed this way. I have also found dark, fall colors photos show more saturation and detail on Canon's when printed in this way. Canon's reds were the best of the three before Epson's K3+vm inkset came out, and Epson's deep magenta and reds are now superior.
I also think its revealing to print a nozzle check and compare each of the inks by themselves. HP's red for example is a joke - a pale orange. Canon's RGB primary inks along with smarter driver ink mixing and on-board 12 bit handling are doing more to expand the gamut and smooth out granger rainbows. Epson's inkset, on the other hand, does quite an impressive job considering the lack of additive primary inks. Epson's high gloss inksets that do have additive primary inks clearly show impressive gains due to those inks so it would be fun to see Epson match HP and Canon's lead in the large format arena.
I totally agree that each inkset is uniquely capable of hitting different gamut areas. Saying that one inkset results in a larger gamut than another inkset would be an (all too common) oversimplification. I would strongly encourage anyone to perform the test mentioned above and weigh the visual results above any misleading gamut plots or anything else when making decisions about what printer to buy. As Neal said, ignore the marketing, forum and expert's hype (all three are typically biased) and do your own tests.