Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Printers > Photo Inkjet

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 31, 2003, 4:10 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2
Default Epson 960 vs. Canon i950 quality

Has anyone evaluated the quality of photo prints from the Epson 960 and the Canon i950? I am leaning toward the Epson right now because of its support for roll paper, but I don't want to sacrifice image quality.

Thanks;
Steve_o
steve_o is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 2, 2003, 2:39 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 506
Default

Well Looking at both under such close eyes I think the 960 still does a better job but the difference would'nt be noted by any normal person. Although one thing you do notice is the depth of field on the epson is still superior. Being that the 960 printer is still considered new make sure you can find some good color profiles out there for it. Or you could always buy it with an Epson 3200 pro scanner which comes with the color profile software. The only problem is the scanner costs more than the printer. But the software that comes with the scanner is worth more than the printer.
Gregersonsalvage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2003, 12:04 PM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 84
Default Re: Epson 960 vs. Canon i950 quality

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve_o
Has anyone evaluated the quality of photo prints from the Epson 960 and the Canon i950? I am leaning toward the Epson right now because of its support for roll paper, but I don't want to sacrifice image quality.

Thanks;
Steve_o
Steve,

Let me throw my .02 cents worth in here (and that's all it is...) When you said quality, I assume that you were referring to the way the prints look immediately after printing. One issue that almost never gets discussed (and I don't know why) is longevity. Both those printers are dye based printers. Dye inks generally give the best pictures, but not the best longevity. I am not familiar with the Canon, I have never used it, but earlier Canons were not very good in the longevity department. Epson came out with the 870/1270 line to make use of new more long lasting dye inks which give superb quality and much greater longevity than what was then available. Until very recently, that line (or at least the Epson printers using that print engine and ink combination) have been the longevity kings among dye based printers. Very recently, a new printer (and it may have been this Canon, I just don't remember) was released that used a different set of 6 dyes for photographic work and it surpassed even the Epson 7 ink dye printers. If you want more information on this topic go to the Wilhelm Imaging web site. Wilhelm specializes in testing print longevity and does research in that area for Epson, among others.

FWIW, I use an Epson 870 (dye based ink) and an Epson 2200 (pigment based ink) depending on what sort of longevity I need from the prints involved. (If you didn't know, there is no comparison between the longevity available from pigment vs. dye based inks...)

I hope this helps!

<TED>
tedj101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2003, 1:06 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 506
Default

Longetivity is another issue I think somewhere here there is a link that shows the canon vs the epson on Real sunlight test. Epson beat out the canon every time.
Gregersonsalvage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2003, 7:51 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 84
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregersonsalvage
Longetivity is another issue I think somewhere here there is a link that shows the canon vs the epson on Real sunlight test. Epson beat out the canon every time.
Yeah, I went back and checked the site and found it was an HP, not a Cannon that was the new leader in dye ink longevity...

<TED>
tedj101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 3, 2003, 9:45 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 506
Default

Yeah it is HP thats the leader in Dye longetivity. But Hp ink still bleeds off the paper if wet and not to mention is also very expensive.
Gregersonsalvage is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:40 AM.