Canon 9000-2 vs other CLI-8 printers: notice much diference?

[nche11]

Mikling, you suspected it was a marketing gimmick didn't you? That's what caught my attention. I was surprised because you are supposed to be very knowledgeable about the difference between typical home versions of 5 color printers and the pro version of Pro9000.

I don't agree with the idea that the number of mega pixels or ISO don't matter much with cameras. I don't agree that the number of cartridges of the printer don't matter either. Despite that some people don't seem to see the differences they are quite different and the specs tell the fact.

I do not agree with you that there is an issue that PM and PC do not blend well with M and C for printers that have PM and PC cartridges. You have said this in another thread and I asked you to explain. I did not see you respond to it. The fact is the PM and PC are for better reproduction of light M, C and all the light colors involving M and C. PM and PC help the color reproduction more accurate and consistent. This may be done with smaller M and C droplets with 1 picoliter print head but the reliability of such print head can be a problem. When the droplet is so small the accuracy and consistency of the droplet is an issue too. I have heard from an executive of an inkjet technology company that it was actually a gimick about 1 picoliter print heads. I would appreciate if you could give an example of the blending problem or give a link to a report of this issue somwhere on the internet.

You will not want to use cheap poor ink in a Pro9000. So comparing an ip4500 with good ink against a Pro9000 using poor ink is not appropriate.

Well you cited an article of comparing Canon 4D and 5D. But that is not analogous to comparing ip4500 and Pro9000. The reason 4D and 5D are not much different does not apply to the printers. Maybe it is just me. The gut of 4D and 5D are very similar. That's my understanding of it. But the gut of ip4500 and Pro9000 are very different.

 

[martin0reg]

nche11,
I think it depends on the meaning of "much" in the title "notice much difference?"
In the test (see the link in previous post) the gamut of a 9500 is even wider than 9000 (and also wider than epson 3880!)

The results for color print quality (12 is highest) / B&W print quality (6) / bottom line print quality (55)
epson 3880: 12/6/53
canon 9500: 12/6/53
canon 9000: 11,5/4,5/51
canon 4500: 11/5/49,5
canon ix5000: 11/2/44,5

We should not trust blindly such tests and make our own experience, but the results make sense to me.

 

[mikling]

nche, you are not interpreting things properly. if the PM and PC relative to the C and M must be properly matched or else you will get an effect called inversion.

The printer is programmed to transition from using PM and M in a certain fashion that is dependent on the inks used. If the inks are not matched closely this transition will occur but not as the designer intended. This can cause problems even when color management is implemented. Similarly, the Red and Green has similar issues. It is not to say that the extra colors are not necessarily beneficial they can be ONLY if the ink is close enough to what the designer intended. What is inversion? on a color ramp, you can sometimes see in certain shades a ripple effect where it gets light and then gets a bit darker again and then returns to being lighter. That is but one example. I have seen it myself and another well regarded member here grandad35 has also mentioned it as well.

nche The 4D never existed and was this not an April Fool's joke?. If I recall correctly

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2008/04/the-real-cost-o.html


The article is in reference to a 40D ( cropped frame sensor) and a 5D (full frame sensor). What the 40D showed is that even with a smaller sensor with good implementation and newer technology, it could match a full frame sensor that has a noise advantage and Potentially better Image Quality. The general opinion at the time was that the cropped sensor cameras could not match the full frame. The reason why this is analogous to the Pro9000 is that it is likely that the next generation printer that will replace the 9000 could end up with fewer inks yet provide higher image quality. I am speculating here, but based on the image quality of Canon's 4 color printers today, I would not be surprised at all and I am fully expecting it.

How could that be? By using or developing newer dye inks and using it optimally. Well artists use something called a color wheel for mixing paint. There's also a lot of technology that the printer mfrs are using that is really under the radar. Here is what Epson touts but each mfr is doing similar things with different names or labels

http://www.printerville.net/2008/02/21/more-on-epsons-radiance-color-matching/

The number of megapixels required is dependent on the final image size and resolution required. It is pointless to be shooting 18 or 24 megapixels when the largest print is going to be 4x6 or even 8x10 or worse yet, to be viewed on an iPad/tablet or even a 1080P "high definition" flat screen.

I have long given up on reading specs. The proof is the final result and I think many others like the Hat agree that the Pro9000 is superior and I agree as well. But I think when people have their CMYK printers, they instantly feel that it must not print anywhere close to that 8 color printer and that is where they will be pleasantly surprised. For many real world images, they are so close that it created this thread. For the few others who constantly push the envelope, only the best will do and maybe you are one of those.

 

[l_d_allan]

Whoever said that the Pro9000 is not superior to the CMYK brethren within the same generation?

In the OP, I didn't mean to infer that mikling was stating that the 9000-2 and iP4500 were equivalent. However, I can see how it could be read that way. My apologies. He was comparing two different printers, and I extended the concept.

With my 9000-2 and ip4500, I can see very subtle differences between test prints like the Adobe ColorFile.tif ... in the cheek flesh tones. It's not clear to me which is preferred, but they are just slighly different. Also, I'll take a closer look at the ramps and patches next to each other.

But I did use the subject "notice much difference".

 

[ni9eofse7en]

Maybe I am missing the blindingly obvious here, I bought a Pro9000 Mk 2 because it can print up to A3+ photos on a range of printing materials. The ip4500 is an A4 printer. If you only print up to A4 then a pro9000 would be a waste of expenditure, and the difference in print quality would not justify the 300 or so difference. Horses for courses as it is said. Oh and you can keep your Porsche, give me a Jag anyday, I have never owned one but hopefully if the tories dont totally screw up my job in the public sector then I have promised myself a nice clean second hand one when I retire.

 

[Redbrickman]

Yep,

I also bought the 9000 for the larger print size, but I will say that if A4 was the biggest size I need to print then the 4500 would have been adequate.

Porsche are OK except for the oil leaks, which are fairly common ion many of the 911's and others.

Rolls Royce, well even they have dropped standards (some would say upped standards) as they now fit BMW engines to the cheaper models