Let's talk printers. How is the Canon Pixma 9500 Mark II?

Hi all -

So recently my fiance's Epson Stylus 4000 wide format died and she bought another. So I took her old broken one and tried to fix it - made some headway but ultimately it doesn't print on glossy paper well at all. So after messing with it I thought wow - that would be great to have a wide format printer and hang some of my shots around the office or at home.

So I started looking at printers and being pretty loyal to Canon, I found the Pixma series. The 9000 and 9500 are really the only two that are in my price range. I ended up asking for the 9500 for xmas from my family so hopefully that shows up on xmas day! But, is anyone using one? I liked that the 9500 had the pigment inks and the multiple grey/black inks for more dynamic range in doing B&W so that is why I went with that model. Has anyone got any experience and if so - how do you like it? I know its expensive in the long run to buy ink and paper but If I can print my own images then I won't feel pressure to buy $30+ prints from the internet... I think that's worth it.

Anyone using one the 9000 or 9500?

I have the 9500
I went away to work for a couple of months - returned and all those ink cartridges had evaporated.

Great results, but make sure you keep using it before the ink dries out cost me about £120 for a new set of inks

Are you happy with the results of the printer? What papers do you use in it?

I "upgraded" from a i9900 about 3 to 4 months ago to the Canon Pixma 9500 Mk II and I like it. It is a bit slower than the i9900, but it gives a much better rendition of black and white prints than the i9900, which gave me B&W prints with a bit of a "caste" to them that I did not seem to be able to get rid of. Yes it is more expensive that the i9900 on a print by print basis, but it is definitely cheaper than buying professional images off the web or the local pro printing shop. I do find that I have to run the "maintenance" on it once a week or so to keep the inks in top shape, otherwise, they tend to settle a bit, but so far no problem. The only regret I have, if there is indeed one to have, that I might have waited until the newer Pixma Pro 1 came out, but didn't know about it until afterwards; however, I did get a real deal on the 9500 (II) - $300 off the list price and free shipping from eastern Canada - it was a limited time deal, so I really felt I couldn't pass it up and it is turning out to be a good unit - I only wish it was a bit faster, but then it is printing with 10 inks instead of the 8 that the i9900 used. HTH.

Cheers,

WesternGuy

If you don't print alot of B&W, consider the cheaper and faster 9000.

I have the 9500 Mk II and have had it for a couple of years now, I believe. My favorite photo paper for it is the Ilford gold fibre silk paper, and they supply an ICC profile that works perfectly for me (matches what I see on my calibrated monitor).

1st class printer, I use Permajet & Hahnemuehle papers with their Icc profiles on my profiled monitors, no problems.

If use shop around on the net you can get Canon cartridges for the printer at good prices.

Thanks all! Santa brought my 9500 Mark II and so far I love it! I see that it does consume the gray a little faster than all of the other inks. I might buy another gray just to have. Maybe buy a gray + ink pack since I have amazon gift cards. Either way - very nice prints I am using the Canon Photo Rag and Canon Semi Gloss photo paper in 13x19.

Only issue I have is - how do you guys print accurately? I am using an LG W3000H monitor (30" S-IPS panel) with really no adjustment. It allows for brightness adjustment and thats it. So, I am printing out letting Lightroom/Photoshop manage the color profile and picking the Canon 9500 Mark II + <Paper Setting> and then trying to understand what "intent" to pick. The prints, though they look good, look a fair bit different than on my screen. How can I account for this? Do I need a monitor calibrator?

Are you using profiles for your paper and 9500?

Yes I am - but then there are "intents" perceptual, saturation, relative color, absolute color - not entirely sure what to use there, and I know my monitor isn't calibrated

I use relative colorimetric for the great majority of my shots. Of course, it is rather important that you have a color managed system. Is your display calibrated? What paper are you using?

Tony-S wrote in post #13604432
I use relative colorimetric for the great majority of my shots. Of course, it is rather important that you have a color managed system. Is your display calibrated? What paper are you using?

Display is not calibrated. I am using Canon Fine Art Paper Photo Rag

I think you ought to invest in a display calibrator. Do you use Photoshop for printing and are using it for managing color? If so, I assume you are choosing the Canon fine art photo rag profile in its print dialog box and also disabling the printer's built-in color management.

Tony-S wrote in post #13604495
I think you ought to invest in a display calibrator. Do you use Photoshop for printing and are using it for managing color? If so, I assume you are choosing the Canon fine art photo rag profile in its print dialog box and also disabling the printer's built-in color management.

Correct I use photoshop to manage the color profile and chooce the canon ICC profile for the paper being used on the 9500. I was looking at calibrators. They are so expensive for the "good ones". I wish I could rent one!

Without calibrating your monitor, you will always at best have an uncertain output. That's just the way it is. Even then, different monitors have different characteristics, but at least calibrating them can get them close to a "standard".

But, like you say, your prints can come out nicely. If they please you and others, well, that's what's important. Getting them to exactly match your monitor can be important for some types of photography, not so much for others. It does cost money to get a monitor that will "cooperate" and a calibrating system that will work well. it's up to you whether it's worth the expense.