Epson 12801290 vs 21002200 vs Canon i9100

[Andi]

Hi,
I'm looking for a A-3 photoprinter and have narrowed down the choice to the Epson 2100 (US 2200) and the new Canon i 9100. Does anybody have experienced both ? A friend of mine works with the Epson 1290 - the results based on a high resolution Nikon-4000 scan are already awesome.
Does anybody have experience in comparing the 1290 with one of the forementioned new printers.
Thanks for your reply !
Andi

 

[nickser]

Hi Andi,
I can heartily recommend the 1290s, except for its speed, it is quite sloth like. My brothers 9000 is also exceptionally good and quicker to boot, so I would expect the 9100 to be even better again. Unfortunately I have not seen prints from the 9100. I just bit the bullet knowing that the 1290s and the 9100 were both great printers and tossed the coin!!
Paul

 

[swoolf]

> Does anybody have experience in comparing the 1290 with one of the> forementioned new printers.

The 2100 is a different kettle of fish to the 1290 - firstly the Ultrachrome pigment inks give you extended print longevity but the colour gamut is a bit different to the dye based 1290's . Arguably their are still some metamerism issues although these have supposedly been reduced to nothing according to some . The 2100 is probably the best printer worth having right now though - no question in my mind. Steve

 

[bobbytan]

I have the Canon S900 and I am thinking about getting the S9000. I've heard there is very little difference between the S9000 and i9100 in terms of image quality ... certainly not enough to justify the approx $200 price difference .

The price of the S9000 has dropped significantly (now under $300), so the S9000 is incredible value.

 

[noidea]

I was in the market for a printer not too long ago. My ideas were either the Epson 2200/1280 or the the Canon S9000.

I took the latter for several reasons:
- Epson 2200 was not available for the longest time
- The Canon has individual Ink tanks (it really saves money)
- The Canon is way faster
- I prefer the colors of the Canon (with Ilford Galery paper and a bit driver tweaking it looks like Velvia on paper)
- The printhead is user exchangeable in the Canon (just burried my third Epson because of clogged heads)

No need to go for the new S9100. IMHO Canon couldn't bring in much improvement - but the price of the S9000 went down US$100 now.

 

[dirk]

I would be also highly interested in difference in print quality between the 1290 and the Epson 2100/2200 and the Canon 9000/9100.

I have read many good comments about the B&W quality of the new Epson 2100/2200. Is this really the case? What is the downside of this printer and is Canon's printer not as good for B&W prints?

Since I use a 1290 currently, can you actually see a difference in color prints between the Epson 2200 and the Epson 1290?

 

[contax520]

>Do not know about the Canon, but the Epson 2200 is extraordinary. Have been a graphic arts service bureau since 1985, and haven't seen a product at that price point do such beautiful output. Taking the time to calibrate your system (using a service, or Monaco/XRite system is well worth the finished product!

 

[Andi]

Thanks Paul an all the others,
after having read all of your comments I think that in terms of image
quality both printers are at the leading edge. May be for B&W prints the
Epson is ahaed because of its additional light-black.
Different points of decision are the more technical aspects like speed and
exchangeability of the printer head and last but not least - the price.
I think in all these aspects Canon is the better choice.
Really hard to decide !
Thanks
Andi