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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 16, 2003, 6:00 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 41
Default i960 VS i900D photo printers

does the i900D use the same 2 picoliter inkjet size and have the same picture quality that the i960 does? Canon's website is very vague in this area, as it gives the 2 picoliter inkjet size for the i950 and i960 and even thier $199, $249 and $299 mutple function printer-scanner-fax-copier, BUT NOT the i900d.

In the review in this section, Steve mentions that it has the SAME Print quality as the i960, but the ONLY drawback is that it is slower (which isn't a BIG issue with me and my needs). I just thought i'd ask (sorry for Questioning the quote by Steve) before I purchased, as either the CANON site was wrong or too vague or Steve is wrong (I am assuming that Canon just didn't privide enough info on the matter)

THANK YOU for you anwers.
rodH is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 17, 2003, 12:42 PM   #2
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 97
Default

The i900D does use the 2 picoliter ink drops. Canon is just vague on their web site. The only different between the way they print is the number of nozzles on the i900D is lower, thus making it a bit slower. Pictures will be identical between the i900D and i960.
pdxbrian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 18, 2003, 1:21 AM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 41
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pdxbrian
The i900D does use the 2 picoliter ink drops. Canon is just vague on their web site. The only different between the way they print is the number of nozzles on the i900D is lower, thus making it a bit slower. Pictures will be identical between the i900D and i960.
I see you work for CompUSA and CANON??

I was initially introduced to these printers, b/c I was on a mission looking to compare the HPs and Epsons, after getting CRAP service at Gateway and Bestbuy I went to CompUSA where I was introduced to teh canons, I was glad I was.

In your opinion, IF my main goal is using it to print pics, and want to use the direct ports for the compact flash and smart cards, and want to beable to print directly from the printer and like the LCD screen feature is the i900d the best option, or should I look into the i960???
rodH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 18, 2003, 1:18 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 235
Default

Rod,

This is what I had pulled up off the 'net:


"Canon's nozzle system is engineered to eject a consistent,
prescribed-volume of ink droplets in sizes as small as 2 picoliters
in volume. With 3,072 nozzles, the i960 photo printer is capable of
firing up to 73.7 million 2-picoliter droplets per second.

The i900D houses a 1,536-nozzle print head that ejects prescribed-
volume ink droplets of 2 and 5 picoliters in volume for the cyan and
magenta standard and photo inks, with 5 picoliter droplets for black
and yellow inks."


I too was inquiring sbout the i960 v i900d in this forum, having not received a reply. I did receive a reply from another forum regarding nozzles & picoliter size. The response:


"The size of the nozzle relates to print
quality somewhat. Smaller nozzles give
more "real" looking prints (ie. ink dots
become nearly invisible.) 2 picoliters is
near the lower limit of the best of the
current models (and those just being released.)

The Epson R800 (announced but not yet
available) claims 1.5 picoliter drops.

The ability to render fine details is
mostly dictated by the resolution of the
printer and the technology being used
(eg., inkjet, dye-sub, laser, etc.)
But there's a lot of gamesmanship in
resolution specs. Different numbers
apply to different technologies.

Suffice to say, there's not much variation
in this particular regard between the best
photo inkjet printers from major brands.

The *number* of nozzles mostly just makes
the printer faster. And this is why most
Canon desktop printers are far faster than
their Epson or HP equivalents."

-end-

I'm looking at purchasing the i960 and perhaps later, a dye sub printer.
Out of curiosity, I'll be keeping my eye on the Epson R800 and Olympus P-440.
If I keep with the Canon i960 then it may be only a matter of purchasing a HiTi printer (Dye-Sub,printing only 4x6) which is priced right.
I would use this printer to send photo's to family & friends as it applies a protective coating preventing UV & water damage.

Anyway, thought to respond. Good luck!

~informativetoo
informativetoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 18, 2003, 3:57 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 41
Default

thank you for your reply, so was the INFO that the 900 and the 960 print the SAME quality correct???? That is really the bottom line for me (I am assuming the answer is yes, since even the $200 all in one canon products do have the 2 picoliter size)

Thanks for your reply
rodH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 19, 2003, 4:09 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 235
Default

Printing the same quality? From what I hear (opinions), yes.
However, if the i960 has 2 picoliter and the i900d has 2-5 picoliter, smaller being better, I can only assume, then, that the i960 would actually be better.
Though perhaps undetectable to the average eye.
If the Canon i900d uses 5 picoliter droplets for the black ink, I question if shadowed areas on photographs might be less defined :?:

I'm a little more critical. My opinion is that while I may not be able to detect small differences well, I'd still much rather have the printer that prints clearer photographs.

Thus far, I have not heard anyone discount or clarify that the i900d has 2-5 picoliter and the i960 has 2 picoliter ink droplets.

My opinon on the LCD: personally, viewing a picture on a LCD wouldn't suit me. I don't like the small size and don't have a need for a "stand-alone. "

If the LCD matters to you, from what I hear both i960 and i900d appear to have and continue to receive good reviews.

I'm responding to share my thoughts. It would be nice to hear feedback from an informed person, having experience with both printers and who happens to have a "critical eye" :shock: What are the chances though? lol

Unless I hear, I'm opting for the i960, followed by the HiTi later.

Be sure to post your decision, followed up with a review, if you would 8)

Take care,
~informativetoo
informativetoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 2003, 12:20 PM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 97
Default

I cannot tell a difference between the same photo on the two printers.

If you are not going to print direct from a media card (i900D) then I'd buy the i960, save yourself a few bucks and it prints about 2.5x faster w/ the far higher nozzle count. If you have a Canon/pictbridge camera you can still print from the front of the i960.

The Epson R800 was a huge paper launch - generally when a company releases a new product its available soon. I think Epson wanted to shake things up a bit with that launch but nobody really paid attention. Especially since the printer won't be out until sometime next year.
pdxbrian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 21, 2003, 6:48 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 235
Default

Re: Epson R800
Quote:
Especially since the printer won't be out until sometime next year.
They claim it will hit the market 02/04
If they could have released it this month, their printer may have made it on many a persons Christmas wish list.
informativetoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 25, 2003, 4:56 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 14
Default Speed . .

If I had to choose between speed and quality I'd choose quality. Luckily with the new Canon's I didn't have to make that choice.

Speed DOES matter when comparing these two printers (i900D vs i960).

Consider the speed ratings per Steve's reviews:

i900D - 4x6 high quality from Camera = 150 seconds (2m 30s)
i900D - 4x6 high quality from PC = 100 seconds
i960 - 4x6 high quality from PC = 35 seconds


So we're talking seconds right? Whats a few more measley seconds? Well lets see now . .

Say you went to a party and your wife wants prints of the 60 shots you took. Not a problem honey, let me load some paper in and fire up the printer . .

Do you want to wait 2.5 HOURS for an i900D to print from your camera? Well you could download those pictures and print from your PC to that i900D but that would take 1 HOUR 40 MINUTES.

Yep, about mid way through that small print job you'll be asking yourself "Hmm I wonder how fast that i960 would do this job . . " Answer? 45 minutes . .



I have no desire to EVER print from a camera or flash memory. The cost to include such an option only makes manufacturers skimp on something else (typically speed). The only market I see for printers like the i900D is for those who cannot afford a PC (but I admit I'm a bit opinionated because I don't think someone who can't afford a PC should own a printer and digital camera).
muzzy996 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 25, 2003, 9:21 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 235
Default

As for speed re: parties & 60 shots...darn, that's a situation I'd never place myself in. Whether 140 or 45 minutes. lol

Speed should really only matter to those attending events or who tend to print numerous photos at once.
For some of us, we neither sell photos taken at events, during the event or would be printing off a boatload of photos at once anyway.


Quote:
(but I admit I'm a bit opinionated because I don't think someone who can't afford a PC should own a printer and digital camera).
Boy, I would never venture to say that. You have to keep in mind that there are many people who are uncomfortable with computers. I don't blame them. Computers are great if you aren't afraid them, all goes well and you know what you're doing.
Sometimes it isn't a matter of what people can afford. It's all about choice.
For many fearful of computers, they have turned to webtv and others, still keep away from either.

If given the choice of having a computer or a digital camera/printer...I'd choose the computer first. The decisions that others make are equally their own.
Really, why should I care or anyone else for that matter?
informativetoo 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 6:00 AM.