Canon Pixma Pro 9000 or 9500 A3 Printer

ChrisH

ChrisH

Messages
4,084
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
Does anyone own one ?

If you do what's your opinion. I'd like to know all the good points and bad points.

Please be as objective as possible, I'm considering buying one and parting with Epson printers which I've stuck with for years.

I have a small business idea for camera money and need to spend wisely.

After reading reports on the Epson R1900 I'm having second thoughts, especially as I have a thing for B&W prints.

Ta in advance.
 
I have a 9500pro mk1, it's currently at canon's as we are having a disagreement on what they consider reasonable ink usage, for print quality it's increadible but mine just eats ink and if you do a bit of research several people have had issues with them.
The 9000 is a dye printer where as the 9500 uses pigment ink which is longer lasting and looks better under glass but more expensive and not easily available in high street stores, where as the 9000 in is cheaper and more easily available.
Also you need to check if they bothered to fix the issue that gave a huge border when printing B&W on one of the paper settings (can't remember which one)
If I was buying again I would be looking at epson.
 
Doing the research it seems the Epson R1900 drinks ink like a wino and doing a lot of research they seem to have their fair share of problems too.

I'm not looking for prints to last for 100's of years, just a reasonable length of time.

I have spent 3 days on training courses at Epson at Hemel Hempstead including a day on printing and I have to admit that set up properly the R1900 gives fantastic output.

One of my main problems is that I may not want to print every day and Pigment inks seem to set in the printer. I have 2 Epson 2000p A3 printers that are knackered due to lack of use and dried up inks.

The Pixma 9000 using Dye inks should be like my old trusty R300 and suffer less. I may be wrong.

I'd be interetsed why you would go to Epson ?


ps I'm looking at the 9000 mk2
 
I have the 9000 mkII this has 8 colours some will tell you pigment is best but now a days dye I think is best.
Pigment ink sits on the surface and forms a rough surface dye sinks into the paper so you have a smooth surface.
the dye will look much sharper on gloss paper as the light get reflected 100% and is not scattered like the pigment inks do.
The ink has a long life
 
Chaz

Any CONS to the printer, I'm after an overall feel.

I have 3 printers in mind at the moment possible 4

Epson r1900
Epson r2880

Both in the picture but a stretch to the 2880. I have seen both at Epson but thats ideal conditions

Pixma 9000 mk2
Pixma 9500

Both the 9500 and the 2880 may be a step too far in price and running costs.
 
dye inks will not dry anywhere near as quikly as pigment ink in the print head, but they don't look as good behind glass imo
ATM I won't go into too much detail as to why I would go with epson as I am still trying to sort out the ink usage issue with canon.
 
Okay thanks for the input.

I spent a day at Epson last year looking at their range of printers. It did ammuse me when they kept dissapearing to get more cartridges but we did hammer their printers big time.

Drying time is not too much of an issue for me, I'm never going to be a pro needing many prints. I just need something that gives good output on gloss matta nd a lilited number of fancy papers.
 
scraggs said:
dye inks will not dry anywhere near as quikly as pigment ink in the print head, but they don't look as god behind glass imo
ATM I won't go into too much detail as to why I would go with epson as I am still trying to sort out the ink usage issue with canon.
Click to expand...

After camera club having a evening with epson many members whent off them after seeing how much ink get wasted
 
I'm in exactly the same boat too.. so watching this thread with anticipation.. I'm leaning towards the epson's but I do like the fact the canon's can print Raw files without the need to convert to tiff or jpeg..
 
Scraggs

Can I ask what the difference is " Under glass "

Is there a difference because Epsons use a gloss optimizer ?

I believe from much reading they use the optimizer even if printing MATT prints :D
 
ChrisH said:
Scraggs

Can I ask what the difference is " Under glass "

Is there a difference because Epsons use a gloss optimizer ?

I believe from much reading they use the optimizer even if printing MATT prints :D
Click to expand...

yes it dose how stupid you have mat paper then you gloss it, I know you can turn it off, but it not done by default
 
ChrisH said:
Scraggs

Can I ask what the difference is " Under glass "

Is there a difference because Epsons use a gloss optimizer ?

I believe from much reading they use the optimizer even if printing MATT prints :D
Click to expand...

pigment prints on matt paper under glass have less sheen than dye on matt, they just look way nicer imo, or at least they do with the canon, I have never owned an epson so can't really comment.
 
What's the quality difference between one of these 'pro' printers and my local labs? Would it be financially beneficial to invest in a printer myself? Its around £3 per A3 print at my local lab which is all I print my landscape at.
 
If you are happy with the print quality of your local lab I doubt it will be cheaper to print them yourself, certainly not using pigment ink and factoring in the price of the printer, the only reason I prefered printing myself was that I have control over the quality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top