[Dean2]

Has anyone compared the photo quality of the prints put out by the new Large Tank, Bulk Ink, printers like the Epson ET 2750 series or the Canon Pixima 3200, versus what has been the commonly used prosumer Photo Printer the Canon Pro 100.

Given how much cheaper the ink is for the large tank models I am thinking that if the photo quality is as good or very close, they might be worth switching to. Would love to hear from anyone who has compared them.

[stevebrot]

Canon Pixima 3200, versus what has been the commonly used prosumer Photo Printer the Canon Pro 100.

Being that the Pixma 3200 is an all-in-one and that all current MegaTank printer models are 4-color units with 8 1/2" x 11" maximum paper size, it is likely that these units are not intended for high quality printing similar to the Pro 100 or Pro 10 printers.


Steve

[jatrax]

photo quality of the prints put out by the new Large Tank, Bulk Ink, printers like the Epson ET 2750 series or the Canon Pixima 3200

I looked at those at the local Office Depot, and the ink cost is very, very attractive. But they are four color office printers. I don't see how they could be compared to an 8 or 12 ink tank photo printer. Though every time I run a set of photo cards through my PRO-1 I wish there was a cheaper alternative.............

[ChristianRock]

The size of the tank shouldn't be here nor there when it comes to the print quality, right?

I have an Epson XP-640 by the way, not a large tank printer but an all-in-one nonetheless. And I'm quite pleased with the print quality even with cheap glossy paper - I get much better prints than I would get with Walmart and about the same I'd get from the corner Walgreens (that still has a pretty big photo lab, I think one of the last ones) - which I've usually been pretty pleased with. I think the main issue with these all-in-one printers is that you can't really print very large. With the Epson I can print up to 8.5x11" which is about as big as I need, I'm not selling pictures. So I'm happy, for my intended purposes.

[Not a Number]

The size of the ink tank shouldn't matter but the quality of the ink, print head and feed mechanism probably do.

The price of the ink is certainly attractive but that doesn't solve the problem of the print heads drying out or clogging.

[Dean2]

Well the reason I am asking is all of the photo printing I have done at home is on a HP OfficeJet G85. It is a 4 color printer and if I get HP 4x6 Premium Photo paper to feed it, and set the printer on the photo quality colour level, it produces some pretty good prints. If I use real high quality glossy 8x11 print paper I can get some very nice large size prints.Now the colors aren't quite to exact match that the monitor shows, but as far as sharpness and clarity 2400x1200 resolution provides some pretty good results.

That is why I was asking if the Pro 10 and Pro 100 really produce that much better a print reulst than the 4 color home and office printers.

[stevebrot]

That is why I was asking if the Pro 10 and Pro 100 really produce that much better a print reulst than the 4 color home and office printers.

The short answer is yes, but much depends on what is being printed. My Pro 100 excels for shadow detail and B&W conversions. I also have a Pixma iP4820 for general use (4-color + photoblack) and while it does a credible job with photo printing to gloss paper it is not up to the task of fine-art printing. 4x6 snapshots got to the 4820. 8x10 and larger go to the Pro 100.


Steve

[jbinpg]

I always had problems with clogging on my old Epson Workforce home printer. Never had clogging problems on my two Canon printers. I just recently got a new Canon G3200 with the large tanks. Not expecting an improvement in printing quality but so far no clogging problems.

[Not a Number]

I mainly use my printers for office / business printing. Part of my problem is I don't print enough documents to keep the print nozzles from clogging. I'm considering a laser printer at this point and am still asking myself it I actually need color as I rarely print photos.

I just dumped a Workforce printer as the head clogged beyond repair. I was looking at the WF tank printer as I really liked the features, speed and print quality of the Workforce. The life and cost of the cartridges was getting very annoying and the tank printer is very attractive except for the clogging issue.

I'm back to a low end HP for now until I decide which way to go. I started out with Epson, got feed up with the life and cost of cartridges, went to HP and got feed up with the print heads dying, the cost of cartridges, how the ink would "expire" when there was still a 3rd or more ink level left. Enough already.

HP has there Instant Ink program which seems an interesting idea. Kind of like cell phone plans you pay a monthly fee at page printed per month tiers, they monitor the ink levels and send you replacement cartridges before the installed ones run out. You return the old cartridge. The cartridges are paired with your printer so you can't use them in other printers and the printer has to be connected to the Internet. The last part I don't like. Like some cell plans you can rollover some of your unused pages per month and switch tiers at any time. There is a free option at 15 or pages per month. Only available on some model printers.

[Winder]

That is why I was asking if the Pro 10 and Pro 100 really produce that much better a print reulst than the 4 color home and office printers.

Yes. The inks are also different. You are looking at a dye based ink for the all-in-one printers and a pigment based ink for the Pro 10 models.

You need to print a lot to justify having a printer like a Pro 10. If pigment ink printer sits for very long the heads clog up. If you are not printing every week, don't buy one. Learning to print well enough to justify a Pro 10 printer is another issue. There is a learning curve to and a workflow that you have to develop if you want to get the most out of a Pro 10 or 100 printer. They are also huge and take up a good bit of space for a very dedicated piece of equipment.

I use a Canon Promark II 9500 and I like it a lot for what I do. I still send a lot of stuff off to get printed just because of the time and cost. If you really want to improve your photography though, get an A3+ printer and learn to use it. When you see you work at that size and you start to compare to what other people are doing you will see what you weaknesses are.

[stevebrot]

They are also huge and take up a good bit of space for a very dedicated piece of equipment.

Mine is on an desk-type work table and it dominates. It also took two people to carry upstairs.


Steve

[dms]

Well the reason I am asking is all of the photo printing I have done at home is on a HP OfficeJet G85. It is a 4 color printer and if I get HP 4x6 Premium Photo paper to feed it, and set the printer on the photo quality colour level, it produces some pretty good prints. If I use real high quality glossy 8x11 print paper I can get some very nice large size prints.Now the colors aren't quite to exact match that the monitor shows, but as far as sharpness and clarity 2400x1200 resolution provides some pretty good results.

That is why I was asking if the Pro 10 and Pro 100 really produce that much better a print reulst than the 4 color home and office printers.

I think the only way to gauge the difference (both in terms of quality(s) and what you consider important) is to make a few prints that are typical, likely in a range of papers, and have them printed professionally and compare. Even the professionally may not be good--so check them out.

In my case using 6 ink set (an older Epson Clara all in one printer) I have compared my matte test prints to high end Epson (from my college printer shop) and they are identical to my eye. This is also the feedback from another experienced printer when I posted this information and others were skeptical. I have not tested glossy or luster (not my usual choices), but those are said to do better on dye printers such as the Clara inks, and to my eye they also look very good.

For completeness I would add I am using photoshop to handle the colors, and I print on Epson medium-to high quality photo paper (so called 4 star and 5 star), with Epson inks.

[madbrain]

Every printer will clog if you don't print frequently enough.
I have both a Canon Pro 100 and Epson Workforce WF-7110 that are majorly clogged due to infrequent printing.
I was able to revive the Pro 100 by taking the print head out and cleaning it. Did waste about 4 cartridges (out of the 8) worth of ink trying to do multiple cleanings, though. At least it's cheap refillable ink. But it was a lot of wasted time.
I guess I need to make a CRON job to automatically print a page every week on each printer.

For the Epson, I have not been able to revive it yet. The print head is not removable. I ordered a cleaning kit from Amazon. It should be here tomorrow. I hope I can fix it. I also wasted much of the refillable ink. The Epson is much more of a pain to use with 3rd party ink than the Canon, too. It always keeps asking if I want to proceed with the 3rd party ink cartridges.

I would recommend the Canon over Epson for this reason. Only reasons I bought the Epson were for more durable pigment ink for printing Tshirts, and the ability to print banners up to 13x48". The Canon can do a max of 13x26". Neither will print borderless in that size, though.

[Dr.T]

I always had problems with clogging on my old Epson Workforce home printer. Never had clogging problems on my two Canon printers. I just recently got a new Canon G3200 with the large tanks. Not expecting an improvement in printing quality but so far no clogging problems.

jbinpg, looks like you've had the Canon G3200 for 3 or 4 months now, what do you think?

[jbinpg]

It is a good multi-function printer. Initially had problems getting one of the cartridges to print properly but it just took a deeper recharge to get it going. Will never be a proper photo printer but at least it doesn't clog.