Considering purchase of used i9900, comments??

[turbguy]

Anyone got anything to say about the i9900 (currently using i960, want wider format for photos)?

 

[The Hat]

Turbguy..

I have an i9950 and I think the i9900 is the same just a US model. I have mine about 4 years now and I run the hell out of it its a real work horse, great quality and beautiful photos. The cons are it eats ink and you might have problems getting all the cartridges for it (8 in all). I run mine on CISS now and the price of ink is no longer an issue. If you want a printer to do the job this is it, mine prints CDs but I dont think the i9900 does. O it has a very large footprint..

 

[ghwellsjr]

You might also consider the i9100 which only uses six cartridges. The extra red and green cartridges that the i9900 has are not used very much and the refill ink for them is not available as commonly as the other colors. See this article for more info.

You can learn more about the differences between these two printers by reading this thread and you can learn more about the i9900 here.

 

[mikling]

I've owned the i9900 and Pro9000 and despite the chip issue the Pro9000 is the one I prefer. They both use the same printhead, but slightly different inksets. The Pro9000 straddles the region between a dye printer and pigment printer better than the i9900 in critical viewing. A pro9000 might be priced about the same as an i9900 just because it is chipped and the i9900 unchipped. Perhaps the Pro9000 might end up being the penultimate dye ink printer if Canon does not bring a successor out.

 

[WhiteDog]

I have run my i9900 since 2004. The current value of this unit is in the role of cheap proofing machine. I have run it with a CIS, as posted somewhere on this board. The head failed after 4 years. I shall keep it until it breaks. In your shoes I would not pay shipping for an item this heavy. I was always steamed over the lack of banner printing.

 

[The Hat]

WhiteDog Wrote:-
I was always steamed over the lack of banner printing.

So was I, thats the one thing that I feel lets the canon printer down.. :/

 

[ghwellsjr]

I have explained why most inkjets don't permit banner printing here.

I admit that Canon could have permitted a much longer sheet of paper than they currently allow, but banner implies unlimited.

BTW, did you know that most Canon printers will allow up to a 23" long sheet of paper, even though they advertise on these wide format printers only 19"?

 

[The Hat]

Ghwellsjr..

The canon ipf5100 does banners (rumored) to be up to 54 feet but to buy that printer a guy would need to do many banners to justify such an outlay. These things a huge and need a lot of space to operate and I for one would only use banner size very seldom. My complaint all a long is that A4 canon printers can print up to a size 22 and the A3+ can only print to 19 Why the change is it solely for (profit). Canon keeps on changing their print drivers and I think its just to push people into buying their larger format. Its only a 5 Minute change to their code to achieve this but a big hole in the pocket for the average Joe soap who just wants to do an occasional banner. Mostly Id want a banner a couple of feet long at the very most, I dont think thats too much to ask for and ten years ago, going from dot matrix to inkjet Epson supplied a complementary batch of banner paper 20 feet long in the printer box as a tryout sample. Well I think Ill just have to go on sticking my sheets together and make do with that..

 

[ghwellsjr]

The iPF5100 has a cutter and accepts roll paper and can print a banner 59 feet long according to these specs.

Have you actually tried to see if you can put in a custom length of 23" on your A3+ printer?

 

[The Hat]

Ghwellsjr..
I have tried everything thats possible. If I put in a custom size over 19 the machine just scales it down again. I can use a 30 or 40 sheet, but can only actually print to 19 on the sheet.