Canon i9900 - anybody using it?? (UPDATE)

[roanjohn]

Please share your experience.............

I currently have the ancient Canon i850 and would like to upgrade to something that can print larger than letter size.

Thanks!!!

Ro1

[Canuck]

I can neither confirm/nor deny this but there seems to be some thought that a Pixma 13x19 is in the works to replace the i9900. I am waiting to see if this materialises.

[roanjohn]

UY!!! I thought that the pixma 8500 and the Canon i9900 have the same output??!!?? I don't think the pixma is any better.

Ro1

[jgbeam]

Fantastic printer! I have an HP7550 Photosmart and an HP 1220C Deskjet and the Canon is better and WAY faster.

Jim

[roanjohn]

Fantastic printer! I have an HP7550 Photosmart and an HP 1220C Deskjet and the Canon is better and WAY faster.

Jim

COOL!!! I think I'm buying it.

Ro1

[billsh]

I bought it a couple weeks ago. I have only run a couple shots through it, but I'm very impressed.

Just my 2 cents.

[aikidoforever]

The i9900 is outstanding. Fast with excellent color reproduction. I love it!!

[roanjohn]

............just ordered it!!! Can't wait!!! WOOOHOOO........!!!

I was torn between this and the Epson R800 - what swayed me to Canon in the end was the fact that its "Canon"...........no...........was the fact that I can print something aside from letter size............and that its Canon :-)

I will make a nice little review when I get it.

Ro1

[blinking8s]

im torn between the i9900 and the Epson 2200...ive seen prints from each and wow! although a friend with the 2200 said it requires a lot of maintenance...but it looks like epson is about to release a new line or something, once again i start shoping when new products are about to be announced...this is how i ended up with a 20d...yeesh

[roanjohn]

im torn between the i9900 and the Epson 2200...ive seen prints from each and wow! although a friend with the 2200 said it requires a lot of maintenance...but it looks like epson is about to release a new line or something, once again i start shoping when new products are about to be announced...this is how i ended up with a 20d...yeesh

At this point, the Epson 2200 (older and slower) is still more expensive than the Canon i9900...........So I can't even imagine the price of its successor.

Ro1

[jgbeam]

im torn between the i9900 and the Epson 2200...ive seen prints from each and wow! although a friend with the 2200 said it requires a lot of maintenance...but it looks like epson is about to release a new line or something, once again i start shoping when new products are about to be announced...this is how i ended up with a 20d...yeesh

The 2200 has problems with glossy paper, which Epson solved with the R800. If you want an Epson 13x19 printer, wait until the R800 technology moves to the larger machines. The Canon, OTOH, does glossy great and is much faster.

Jim

[roanjohn]

Finally came to my doorstep.

First off, this machine is HUGE!!! It filled up half my desk space!!! :shock:
Design is very curvy............I much prefer the sqaured design of the pixma line - its more modern.

Setting up the printer is easy to follow using the big poster with step by step instructions. The whole setup including the printehead calibration took around 30 minutes.

And now its time to print.............and this thing is AWESOME!!! The prints are aboslutely stunning............from 4x6 all the way to 13x19..............who needs ofoto?? I feel like I have my own photo stand at home!!!

So glad I purchased it.

Ro1

[CyberDyneSystems]

Ive had an i9100 for close to a year now (bought it ONE WEEK before the i9900 was announced :( )

But.. I truly am blown away by these canon printers. They seem to be trouble free and unbeatable as far as image quality.

[roanjohn]

But.. I truly am blown away by these canon printers. They seem to be trouble free and unbeatable as far as image quality.

I agree!!! My old i850 used to go through months without usage........and it still prints beautiful photos everytime.

I was comparing the photos from my i850 (4 ink tanks) to the i9900 (8 ink tanks) and the difference are minimal. The i9900 does have more punch to it........the colors are more vibrant and realistic..........skin tones are more accurate (probably due to the extra colors)..........and the dots are almost non-existent.........but from a distance.........very hard to tell the difference between the two.

One huge plus though is that poster print size the i9900 produces............it will make you go WOW!!!

Ro1

[CyberDyneSystems]

Two other amazing attributes of these printers,

Fast and Quiet!

[jgbeam]

You're gonna need this right away:

http://www.2filter.com/canon/canonBCI6tanks.html

If anyone has a better source, please post a link.

Jim

[tarves57]

I bought the i9950 recently, which is the European version of the i9900 and it is FANTASTIC.
Really unbelievable prints.

[johnleveritt]

You're gonna need this right away:

http://www.2filter.com/canon/canonBCI6tanks.html

If anyone has a better source, please post a link.

Jim

Thanks for the link. I've been using Staples online store, and your source is a buck cheaper per tank. Plus with Staples, you have to buy three tanks to get their "Cheapest" price.

[jgbeam]

planesh00ter posted this link in another message. All BCI-6X cartridges for $9.99.

http://www.itsupplies.com/cgi-bin/itsupplies.storefront/41addc5e022664442740400180140611/Catalog/1040

Still lower prices anyone? My next order figures to be more than $150!!

Jim

[roanjohn]

Two other amazing attributes of these printers,

Fast and Quiet!

AMEN!!!

Jim - thanks for the link!!!

Ro1

[Dale]

Finally came to my doorstep.

And now its time to print.............and this thing is AWESOME!!! The prints are aboslutely stunning............from 4x6 all the way to 13x19..............who needs ofoto?? I feel like I have my own photo stand at home!!!

So glad I purchased it.

Ro1

Are the colors good right out of the box or have you created printer profiles for each type of paper you use?

[roanjohn]

Dale - I only use Canon papers, and everytime I print I select the paper size and type using the easy printer software that came with the printer. So far, the colors and contrast are pretty similar to my untrained eye and uncalibrated monitor.............so I guess its a good thing. :D

Hope this helps.........

Ro1

[Kadath]

Fast and Quiet!

I notice that 'low cost' is not among the qualities listed. =)

I'd be interested in seeing a TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) comparison of the i9900 for 500-1000 prints vs. an Ofoto or Costco print service. Has anyone seen anything like that?

Sam

PS reminds me of the old engineer's adage:
"Do you want it:
Fast
High Quality
Low Cost

Pick any two."

[planesh00ter]

Interesting item from Inkjet news.......

Q: What are my choices for 13" wide photo inkjet printers, and which is best?

A: Not knowing your needs will require a little more explanation, since what is "best" for one person, may not be for another. There are three choices: The Epson Stylus Photo 1280 ($399), The Canon i9100 ($499), and the Epson Stylus Photo 2200 ($699). These first two printers use "dye" ink. Image longevity with these dye inks is about the same for both printers: about 10-15 years behind glass before noticeable fading with most papers. You can get 25-38 years with special swellable polymer papers (Epson ColorLife Photo Paper and the Ilford Galerie "Classic" papers), but they are only available in gloss or semi-gloss finishes. Either, way the dye inks are quite suitable for certain "event" photography prints or flea market art prints where longevity is not an issue. Dye ink is also suitable for your portfolio prints, where images are changed every few years, or whenever prints are displayed in a book (dark storage longevity is usually twice as long wall display longevity) rather than on the wall Some artists prefer the Epson dye inks over the pigment inks for their portfolio books because they print slightly more saturated than even the best pigmented inks (and the blacks from the Epson dye ink on Epson Matte paper Heavy Weight is the deepest black we've ever seen --slightly richer than the 2200's UltraChrome Matte Black ink on Epson Enhanced Matte).

The Epson 1280 is priced about $100 less than the Canon, but the Canon is about three times faster in print speed (making it a better choice as a location "event" printer). The Canon is slightly more economical to operate because it uses 6 individual ink cartridges, whereas the epson uses a black and a 5-cell color cartridge. If one color cell goes dry, you have to toss the cartridge (Epson cartridges are opaque, so you can't see how much ink you're throwing away - the individual Canon ink "tanks" are clear). Throwing out the E1280's color cartridge usually wastes about 20% of the ink, UNLESS you are printing a bunch of prints from the same image file. I these cases it's not uncommon to have 40% or more of the other colors still left when one color cell runs dry, because the light magenta or light cyan or yellow inks go quickly (depending on your image). As for print quality, the Epson 1280 the Canon i9100 are closely matched. However, to get that quality on the Canon, you'll need to stick with Canon's Photo Paper Pro, which is very expensive. The Epson 1280 seems to print well on a much wider variety of papers, even many non-Epson papers. One last thing, the Canon i9100 is limited to media that is 13" x 19", whereas the Epson 1280 can print panoramic images as long as 43" (on up to 13" x 44" media). The Epson 1280 can also handle 2" core roll media. Canon does not offer a roll paper option. Both printers can do borderless printing in all popular sizes up through 13" x 19".

http://www.inkjetart.com/canon/index.html -- Canon i9100
http://www.inkjetart.com/1280/index.html -- Epson 1280
http://www.inkjetart.com/cis/index.html -- Bulk ink system for 1280

Your other 13" solution is the Epson 2200. It's more expensive, but worth it if you are interested in prints that last. It's pigmented UltraChrome inks (7 inks -- this inkset adds a "Light Black") are the current industry standard in fine art "giclee" printing (with display longevity on most fine art papers hitting around 70-100 years, and dark storage over 200 years on many papers). Color gamut of these inks is very near to that of dye inks, with the exceptions I've already noted above. The 2200's individual ink carts give fairly decent economy. Expect ink costs to be between $2.00 - $3.00 per square foot (11 x 14 image), depending on image density (this is about 10-20% higher than the two printers that use dye inks). There are several continuous bulk inking systems available for 2200 and the 1280 (we haven't discovered a bulk feed system for the Canon i9100) that greatly reduce your ink costs (1/5 to 1/10 the cartridge operation costs), but you'll lose the advantage of having the option of choosing between Epson's Photo Black cartridge (best for gloss and luster finishes) and the Matte Black cartridge (best for matte and fine art papers). The bulk ink systems must use a "universal" black ink that is a compromise, because it has less DMax on gloss/luster papers and less DMax on matte/fine art papers than the DMax you get when matching the right Epson black cartridge with your media. Many third party bulk inks do not match ("plug-n-play") the Epson inks, so you also must also use the manufacturer's custom ICC profiles in order to get good color management. A BIG benefit of the model 2200 is the straight paper path option in the back of the printer. Both the Epson 1280 and Canon i9100 choke on thick fine art papers that are over 0.012" (12 mil) thick (usually about 250 gsm in weight). The 2200 can easily take papers that are over 500 gsm in weight and over 0.050" (50 mil) thick! The Epson 2200 can handle media sizes up to 13" x 44". It can also handle 2" core roll media, and includes an automatic roll paper cutter, which is detachable if you rarely print from roll paper.

http://www.inkjetart.com/2200 -- Epson 2200
http://www.inkjetart.com/archival_inks/cave/ -- Bulk ink system for 2200

(ANSWERS TO FAQ'S is a regular feature of this newsletter.)

http://www.inkjetart.com/news/archive/IJN_04-18-04.html