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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 6, 2006, 4:46 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 89
Default

...Canon Pixma iP6600D vs. Canon Pixma iP5200R vs. Epson Stylus Photo R340? I want the absolute best photo quality. I will sacrifice speed over quality. Or another recommendation around $200 max. Thanks.
gobucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jul 6, 2006, 5:40 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 735
Default

gobucks wrote:
Quote:
...Canon Pixma iP6600D vs. Canon Pixma iP5200R vs. Epson Stylus Photo R340? I want the absolute best photo quality. I will sacrifice speed over quality. Or another recommendation around $200 max. Thanks.


The Pixma ip5200R is a wireless edition. If you want wireless, great, but if not you can always save some money on the ip5200.

The r340 has a screen with card slots. If you want those features, great. Otherwise consider the r2x0 which floats at about $100 or $72 for the R220 from the epson referb store. They also tend to carry the r200 for $59, sometimes, a price less than the cost of the ink it comes with. They also have the r800 referb for $199 shipped. Epson is rather the exception, the r2x0 doesn't offer pictbridge, nor does the more spendy r800.

The ip6600D is really the excpetion, it offers the screen and the cardslots without an option for without for less.

The hp8450 which can be had on closeout is a top notch photo printer worth considering and can be had for dirt cheap if you search froogle.com. On top of the fact it's a 3 cartridge 9 tank photo printer, it offers a screen, cardslots, and onboard networking, which all can be hand for a song. It will cost alot to refill, but you do get alot from those cartridges.








zakezuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2006, 6:27 AM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 89
Default

zakezuke, thanks for the reply. I was thinking the iP5200 but typed the wireless model. I would probably not want the HP if the ink is expensive. So of the Canons and Epsons, which model would give the best results for photo quality? Say if the r340 has great quality, and I did not need the screen and card slots, I would still rather buy the one with better photo printing capabilties. BTW, I am not satisfied with my current Canon i850 because of poor print quality that does not match the photos on screen. Trying to resolve this problem.
gobucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2006, 10:38 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 735
Default

gobucks wrote:
Quote:
zakezuke, thanks for the reply. I was thinking the iP5200 but typed the wireless model. I would probably not want the HP if the ink is expensive. So of the Canons and Epsons, which model would give the best results for photo quality? Say if the r340 has great quality, and I did not need the screen and card slots, I would still rather buy the one with better photo printing capabilties. BTW, I am not satisfied with my current Canon i850 because of poor print quality that does not match the photos on screen. Trying to resolve this problem.
I have met the i850 once. I picked one up at goodwill. I can't say I was pleased with the color but I was using the same ink as I would for the ip3000. I'm not sure if it would do better with bci-3e color ink as is reccomended or not.

If this helps you out, here is a scan of an image printed on the mp760 (close to the ip4000) using MIS ink.
http://img97.imageshack.us/my.php?im...enitza14yz.jpg
http://img97.imageshack.us/my.php?im...bc600015fc.jpg

Near as I'm aware, the r340 is not a better printer than the r220/r240. It is however onsale at compusa for $130, and on top of that there is a $30 rebate, where the r220 floats at about $99 new, or $71 shipped from the epson store. Normaly I would say as I did before, it has extra cardslots and a screen and you can save a few bucks on the r220. But at $130 and a $30 rebate, I wouldn't mind having cardslots and a screen. This being said, the epson referb store also has the rx600 for $130, or the rx500 for $90, shipped. I.e. the all in one versions are as cheap as a new printer.

Since nothing much as changed between the r200 and r340, I "can" fairly contrast it with the canon ip3000, which I have to say I prefered the r200 for it's color rendering. I can't fairly contrast it with the ip5200 as I sold the ink on my replacement unit, and am too lazy/cheap to order up more. I can say I'm very pleased with my ip5200, would pick it over the ip5200 as my r200 experence was not so spiffy. I would lean tward the Epsons for color, and the Canons for reliablity.

But the best thing to do is to go to your friendly neighborhood store with a pictbridge enabled camera and photo paper and print the same image from each one. Someone like my self won't say printer a is absolutly better than printer b as what I like in terms of colors might not be what you like. Most stores will agree so long as you leave the prints in the shop. Do try the r340 vs the ip6600 or even the ip5200 and see for your self.



zakezuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2006, 11:57 AM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 89
Default

thanks zakezuke, you gave me the info I wanted with be impartial. You have definetly narrowed my search.
gobucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2006, 12:57 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Indian Rocks Beach, FL
Posts: 4,036
Default

The iP5200 is a general purpose printer with a large black tank for text. It does an excellent job on photos with only 3 colors plus photo black, but probably isn't quite up to the photo quality of a 6+ color dedicated photo printer like the iP6600.

If it is to be your only printer I would go with the iP5200. If you already have a printer and intend adding one just for photos you might get slightly better photos with the iP6600.

slipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2006, 8:17 PM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 89
Default

This would be my only printer. I was leaning towards the 6600, but considering the Epson r800 from the Epson store. What is a man to do? I definetly want results that show an improvement over my current Canon i850; actually a big improvement.
gobucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2006, 9:22 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 735
Default

gobucks wrote:
Quote:
This would be my only printer. I was leaning towards the 6600, but considering the Epson r800 from the Epson store. What is a man to do? I definetly want results that show an improvement over my current Canon i850; actually a big improvement.

The ip4200 and the ip5200 are better general purpose printers. They offer two blacks, one for glossy photo paper, the other for plain paper, where as your i850 has only the large pigmented black. Now it's not as cheap as the bci-3e which floated at about 2.5c/page, it'll cost more like 3.2c/page, but still low. I don't think text resolution has changed much, nor can I say I honestly noticed a difference on the i850 I picked up at goodwill which was for a friend as an office printer.

Now the Canon ip6600D, The epson r2x0/r3x0 are photo printers offering no pigmented black what so ever. You can do text on them if you like, but you'll spend more and get less yield. They are not likely to be as good as your i850, nor the ip4200/ip5200 for plain text on regular paper.

Lucky for you I have links to tomshardware which includes text quality in their tests
-canon ip8500/epson r800/hp8450-
http://www.tomshardware.com/2004/12/...l#text_quality
-ip4000 epson r300 and others-
http://www.tomshardware.com/2004/10/...or/page10.html
-ip4200 / ip5200 / hp 8250 / hp 8050
http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/12/...et/page15.html

The r800 on the otherhand is all pigmented ink, so you can at least feel safe using it for envelopes. I prefer the older ip4000 to the r800 for raw text output but I have used the r800 to do barcodes, and they were even readable most of the time. But the funny thing is, what you got, the i850, that's pretty good for text. It would not be foolish to keep that in service as the OEM bci-3e black is round and abouts of $12.50 for 500pages. The ip4200/5200 would be more, and the others would be even more.
I can't say i've done many barcodes on the i850, but the few I have done were readable. Note, this would only apply to plain paper, the moment you hit photo paper the big black on the i850/i4000/ip4200/ip5200 etc... etc... are not used. Your I850 would mix all three colors get get a dye black which is a short comming on matte paper and non glossy photo paper... I tried the matte paper setting and ended up with soggy paper, so I just used the plain paper setting, problem solved.






zakezuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2006, 2:52 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 139
Default

What I find somewhat missing in this thread is any mention of what used to be the Canon advantage.---namely the ability to do very good photoprinting at a very low price using either third party prefilled cartridges or by refilling.--or in short--the now discontinued but still somewhat available non-chipped Canons that use the BCI-3&6 cartridges.

While the Canon i850 partially meets the definition, its lack of a photoblack leaves it short in the photoprinting department. The ip4000 or ip5000 are therefore better photoprinters because they have that photoblack the i850 lacks.--yet still fall into the also double as a general purpose printer area.

For non-chipped Canons that are specialised photoprinters---look at the i6000d---or that step up to a the i8500---or even the wide carriage i9100.

But get into a chipped Canon using the CLI-5&8 cartridges and you lose that Canon advantage---you can't use third party prefilled cartridges and refilling is an exercise in fighting the chip. But refilling or using third party cartridges is the only way to beat the super high costs of photoprinting.

The Epsons with pigmented ink may be the more achival ink---but you trade less dynamic color and printer reliability in the process.

Just my two cents worth---it may take some creative shopping---try ebay---but the non-chipped Canons are still the way to go.
Osage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2006, 3:19 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 735
Default

Osage wrote:
Quote:
What I find somewhat missing in this thread is any mention of what used to be the Canon advantage.---namely the ability to do very good photoprinting at a very low price using either third party prefilled cartridges or by refilling.--or in short--the now discontinued but still somewhat available non-chipped Canons that use the BCI-3&6 cartridges.

While the Canon i850 partially meets the definition, its lack of a photoblack leaves it short in the photoprinting department. The ip4000 or ip5000 are therefore better photoprinters because they have that photoblack the i850 lacks.--yet still fall into the also double as a general purpose printer area.

For non-chipped Canons that are specialised photoprinters---look at the i6000d---or that step up to a the i8500---or even the wide carriage i9100.

But get into a chipped Canon using the CLI-5&8 cartridges and you lose that Canon advantage---you can't use third party prefilled cartridges and refilling is an exercise in fighting the chip. But refilling or using third party cartridges is the only way to beat the super high costs of photoprinting.

The Epsons with pigmented ink may be the more achival ink---but you trade less dynamic color and printer reliability in the process.

Just my two cents worth---it may take some creative shopping---try ebay---but the non-chipped Canons are still the way to go.
Well... while I agree canons are out of the box easier to refill, refilling support on the Epsons is pretty decent too. You probally don't want to refill the OEM cartridges, but there are a ton of refillable tanks, self resetting chips, chip reseters, you name it. I may choose not to use my epson but I have to admit there is a wider varity of inks available for the Epson than Canon. If I were to use my epson again I would likely pickup some cheep sponge type cartridges from... I believe it's alotofthings. I wasn't pleased with my sponge free cartridges. Others enjoyed better luck.

The big thing with epson is the micro piezo printheads, i.e. not thermal. With canons you are rather limited with your choices of ink as it needs to expand with heat properly to work. Epsons push the ink so long as the viscosity is right it'll work well.

While I would agree the i850 lacks the photo black cartridge, I must say that the ip3000 did a trully bang up job on photos, easily compairable to the ip4000/mp760 except in some odd cases. I'm not sure exactly how it is on color as my test was with the wrong inks, and the image looked a tad weak. The main reason I decided to upgrade to the ip5200 is the fact i've been doing covers in both english and japanese, and the kanji is legible at smallish fonts on the ip5200 where the ip3000 and even the mp760 (ip4000 basicly) were a tad blured.

The epson r2x0/r3x0 are dye models though I have heard of people filling up those models with pigments. I'm not saying this is a good idea, only that i've heard of it. I might give it a shot one of these days.



zakezuke 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 6:12 AM.