Canon Pixma Pro 10 vs. Pixma Pro 100

As Canon rebates end at the end of the month, I am considering either the Canon Pro 10 or the Canon Pro 100 Printer.
Having not had the opportunity to see a side by side comparison of the Pro 10 pigment vs the Pro 100 dye, does anyone here have experience with both printers.
Sure pigment is supposed to last longer and the dye supposedly more vibrant and punch for color.
Most of my work is in color.
Thanks.

I've been thinking of the Pro 100 as the prints I saw were great - just concerned about the cost per print especially for 13x19.

I chose the Pro-100.

If you add a 50 sheet pack of Semi-Gloss, the rebate doubles to $200. So $100 off list, $200 reebate

I have the Pro 9000II, which is the predecessor of the Pro-100, and it produces very good results on a wide variety of papers. However, the real issue, IMHO, is not quality of output. It is dye vs. pigment. Dye-based inks produced very vibrant colors and, in my experience, never produce clogs. (I have two canon dye-based printers, one 4 or 5 years old. both occasionally go unused for long periods of time, and neither one has ever needed any cleaning at all--I just turn them on and print.) The downside of dye is that the prints will fade much faster. If you want to sell prints, or want them to last longer than you, you don't want dye. For my uses, i was more concerned with avoiding clogs than archival properties, as I rarely will let a print go more than a few years before replacing it, but if I were selling, I would either use a lab or by a pigment based printer.