Canon G3200 MegaTank Nozzle Check

[stratman]

Was at the local big box store and the Canon G3200 MegaTank AIO was plugged in, filled with ink, and a sheet of paper was at hand. I wanted to run a test print like I have done with other display models, but it seemed there wasn't one programmed. I did find the nozzle check function in the LCD menu on the front of the printer. It took quite a while before it printed out from power on - over a minute - which may have been the purging of ink. Lots of ink.

The artifact at the far right of the first Cyan swath is due to a wrinkle in the paper. The nozzle check itself appears flawless in person.

Looks good!

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

the nozzle check looks flawless - indeed.
I briefly tested a G1400 about a year ago, mainly the fading performance of the G-type of inks supplied with these Megatank printers. I made a similar observation - the driver as supplied with the printer did not give the option to print a nozzle check via the driver but only via the front panel , and then a driver update was annnounced, and this newer driver version brought back the nozzle check in the maintenance section of the driver.

 

[stratman]

Cost of OEM Canon ink found at multiple sites:

GI-290, 70 ml, CMY Dye-based inks - $12

GI-290, 135 ml, BK Pigment Black ink - $18

Third party inks available.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

Yes, those inks are remarkedly cheap, similar to the Epson Ecotank inks. But there is a hidden
pitfall - those inks - Canon or Epson - by far do not give the same UV/ozone fading resistance as the Chromalife or Claria inks as tested about a year ago. You may not need that performance in all cases for your prints but Canon/Epson don't tell you upfront , they just talk about stability for generations to come etc. A similar type of ink for HP tank system printers was performing much better than these.

 

[stratman]

those inks - Canon or Epson - by far do not give the same UV/ozone fading resistance as the Chromalife or Claria inks

Yep, that is one of the negatives. Also image quality suffers.

For some these issues may not be deal breakers. The relatively high initial cost of the printer is more likely to turn some of those in the targeted population to buy something else. If they looked at Total Cost of Ownership they might reconsider given the very low cost of refill ink.

 

[mikling]

Epson and Canon are like the old FRAM commercials. Pay me now or pay me later.
We do know these are bottom rung machines. You pay up front and bet against Canon and Epson that the printer will last the long mile plus. Canon and Epson bets that the printer and its use will not make it past the long mile. Notice the bolded and underlined? Many purchasers will not continue to use the printer this is designed for in the long run. Media is shifting and these printers DO NOT replace a true photo printer which is possibly the last category left standing in the inkjet world. For many people nowadays not ALL, a cheap printer or even laser might be a better option.
Remember the payback on these printers will not be the first year and 1 yr warranty is done at that time. So you the USER now face the risk of the machine breaking down during the payback period in subsequent years. So Canon and Epson is holding the money and they will expect to win the bet on average. They've got this figured out.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

Also image quality suffers.

these Canon G-series Megatank printers are coming just with 3 dye inks CMY - and a pigment black which just does not make them into photo printers at all. It's the ink pricing and the refill convenience which targets a particular group of customers , but I'm not sure that many people look for the total cost of ownership after a year or two. I'm happy with several Epson Ecotank printers, they are mechanically the same as the regular cartridge type models and will last as long, I'm not counting years but rather pages printed

 

[stratman]

They've got this figured out.

Hence the high up front cost to purchase.

these printers DO NOT replace a true photo printer

Of course. I don' think that is the targeted group.

This printer is for a home office or someone like my sister who have low expectations on image quality. I would recommend seeing text and image quality before purchasing. Is there better? Absolutely.

Third party ink suppliers probably have low to no expectation of profiting much on these printers. The Canon Pro 100 on the other hand...

 

[stratman]

does not make them into photo printers at all

Yep.

targets a particular group of customers

I wrote my comment above while you wrote and posted yours. Interesting how we both used the same or similar words.

I'm not sure that many people look for the total cost of ownership after a year or two.

Why I said "if". They recoup cost on the first refill compared to smaller capacity cartridges.