Canon i9900 vs. Epson R800

Has anyone seen output from both of these printers? The i9900 gets unanimous raves in this forum and I have seen several reviews of both printers with no significant negatives for either one. None of the reviews I have seen compare the two printers. I have seen output from the Epson and I can honestly say that I simply cannot believe that it is possible to get a sharper image than this (this shot was from a 22MP back on a Hasselblad, printed on 8 1/2 x 11 Ilford glossy paper). I know the Canon is faster and is a 13x19 printer, but these are not important differences to me. I already have a 13x19 printer for the rare occasions when I need the size, and for low volume printing speed is not an issue. The cost difference is negligible.

For image sharpness and color rendering, which one is better?

Jim

cant comment on the canon ..but i do love my Epson R800.. using Ilford smooth pearl / Epson Premium glossy

Thanks for the reply. I have seen why the R800 is a winner. I've got to find a canon 9900 to check out before I decide.

Jim

I think you should definately check out the Canon also to make your own comparison. I have a i950 myself (incidentally only a year old and already 2 generations due) and have been very happy with the Canon print engine. I had been comparing with Epson back then and reading reviews until I started seeing 2pl ink drops everywhere

Anyway - why I chose Canon and afaik these arguments are still valid today:
- nicer photographic quality detail on glossy paper. Note the i9950 has also red & green cartridges. The last review I saw was at http://www.photo-i.co.uk …/Canon%20i9999/​page_4.htm - where they show how those last-generation extra inks add again to the print quality.
- even smooth output when looking from an angle (!! ever looked at an epson pic from a sharp angle - the reptile skin look is a dead giveway)
- replaceble print head. I removed my printhead once to clean it myself, being able to was a big advantage!
- no head clogging with canon - did you read the numerous posts and user experiences with head clogging on epson printers?
- canon is sooo much faster in printing. was not my concern initially, yet I'm always happy to see it burst out a page in no time.

cons
- print longetivy... the difference is however much smaller than you would think. canon has silently upgraded their pro paper specs and they are less prune to gas fading. using Ilford Gallery Pearl apparently also helps
- canon printers are more picky on choice of ink and paper. I made mistake of trying kodak papers and other non-oem media and inks. always with mediocre results.

Just out of curiosity, what made you feel Epson is the clear winner?

I said A winner, not THE winner. Based on a jaw-dropping print from the Epson on Ilford glossy paper. If the Canon can match that print, I'll take the Canon. I've had bad luck (paper feed problems) with two previous Epson printers and am reluctant to go back. My last two printers have been HP's and have been trouble free - great prints to boot. I think I'm leaning toward Canon, but I sure would like to see some i9900 output before I commit.

Thanks for your reply.

Jim

Before you buy anything, do make sure and see an example of the Canon output, or any printer in the running (preferably on the paper that you'll be using) for that matter. I've been using Epson printers in all size formats including the 3000 for years, and I switched to the I9900 for my newest printer.

I have not tried the Canon i9900, but I do have the R800. I have had mixed success with the 800 on my Mac. The profiles for the mac are quite bad and i have resorted to using the ones for the next model up (I think it was the 1800?). I may have a bad printer, but Epson has not been able to help. I would happily replace mine if it weren't for the cost. If anyone has any hints on how to improve the quality, I would be grateful. (Problems include washed colours, brown patches and green colour skew).