Starting with PRO-200

[palombian]

@Ink stained Fingers , you should start your own institute and ask funding for your investigations !

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

thanks for the tip - but it's only fun as long as it is a hobby........

 

[palombian]

thanks for the tip - but it's only fun as long as it is a hobby........

Indeed, and you are free to speak...

 

[websnail]

Just to note I've edited my earlier post to clarify my comments on the prism changes.

EDIT: Just to clarify about the prism comment. The PGI-72 had a prism that was used as part of the ink level/compatibility indication system (ie: it showed full red when accepted and full, flashed when low, remained out when ink monitoring was disabled, etc..). The PGI-9 and 72 cartridges have never had the other type of prism used in consumer desktop models (eg: PGI-5, CLI-8) that were a hold over from the pre-chip days.

Wouldn't want to confuse anyone who assumed there was a single use for the prisms... and to be honest I'm actually reading the changes as being positive in terms of recycling, manufacturing costs, etc... I'm also wondering if they've managed to really fine tune their ink usage algorithms to allow minimal wastage or just tried to hide it. Something for my little team to test with the empty carts we'll be collecting over the coming months.

 

[mikling]

The prior post is still not comprehensive.

The decision to eliminate the prism is fairly recent. The CLI-42 definitely still uses it. Yes, it was not on the PGI-72,PGI-9 because physically it could not be done. Instead Canon left a fair reserve ink level to accomodate fluctuations and take care of inaccuracies. Even the Pro-1 retained an optical sensor that worked a little different than a prism but it was optical based using refractive indices as the workings just like a prism but it was not shaped as a prism.

So when did Canon eliminate it? The story unfolds in another model of printer that clearly delineates the evolution because the same outward body was retained for three generations. This model of tanks were the PGI-CLI 250/251 the 270/271 and then the 280/281. (In other markets it may be 550/551, etc.)

The 250/251 retained the prism. The prism was eliminated upon the introduction of the 270/271 but the LEDS were retained. In the 280/281 series LEDs were eliminated.

One will not know exactly why BUT Canon saw fit to revise their tooling to make the new tanks and this tooling revision is expensive. One reason could be that fitting a prism onto an opaque body is costly and the cost benefit was still worth it. The other cost aspect is on the printer itself. The elimination of an emitter/receiver circuit on all channels.
The other area of cost elimination is that there are NO leds on the tanks as well with all signalling sent to the printer display. There was oversight to this on the 270/271 models as there are models which had tanks with LEDs and printer displays.

So here we arrive at the PRO-200 and all evolutionary changes have been incorporated. No redundant LEDs, and the prism eliminated. No surprise at all if one was following carefully. Each step has been careful and calculated. One needs to think about whether by calling "EMPTY" earlier ( allowing LESS of the initial ink to be used) they can be reasonably sure that in 99.999% of the time that the printer will not run out of ink. Maybe this is not the case but one can engineer this aspect and remove the prism. To determine this would be very difficult for many reasons I won't cover but it is complicated to test this.

 

[The Hat]

The prism is gone from both new cartridge types which, given that the printhead doesn't appear to have changed begs the question of how they'll indicate low/empty cartridges in the printer itself.

The PGl-72 never had a prism so this information only applies to the new CLl-65 cart.
There is no difference in the shape of the CLl-65 cart, so a CLl-42 cart can be used in place of the opaque CLl-65 cart, but the chip still remains a problem, (Can’t reset !) and it’s debatable as to whether a redsetter can or will be made.

Still the same circuit board design on the chips so a chip resetter (if one becomes available) won't need a new mould. chip circuitry does look slightly different but contact points are in same place. Waiting to hear back from the REdSETTER team on what the actual programming is like though.

The cartridge chips on both these new carts are identical from the front and are set in the same positions, but there is no LED light on either of them on the rear, and this will make a resetter less lightly, when I tried to rest both carts using older resetters, I got no indication from the chip that it was responding to any commutations from my resetter. !

Oh and afterthought... The cartridge types are not zoned, so the CLI-65 should be common to the Pro-200 wherever you get it (although presumably not the Japanese version) and the same for the Pro-300 with the PFI-300.

Both the PGl-300 and CLl-65 carts ARE zoned for different regions so this too will cause some issues in the making a universal resetter for all regions.

The only way for the near future to refill both these printers will be to run with the ink monitoring disabled, that’s going to take a brave man to do that on their brand new printer, in fact a recipe for disaster for many.. But a bonanza for the ink retailers... This advice may also get them blamed when things go pear shape..

Removing the carts to view or weight them to check the ink levels will work but that will cause a purge every time, and coupled with the extra purges because of ink monitoring been disabled, this will cause the ink pads to fill much quicker. ! !

 

[palombian]

Cartridges for PRO-300 in Europe and in the States are both named PFI-300, so not zoned.

 

[The Hat]

Cartridges for PRO-300 in Europe and in the States are both called PFI-300, so not zoned.

A chicken is called a chicken on both continents, I have both carts here in front of me and they both have Europa N.V. printed on the labels, if that’s not regional then I’ll have the duck..
Purchased from Canon Europa N.V. Amsterdam...

 

[mikling]

Let's do some MATH.

If you perform some simulations using a base situation as someone using OEM tanks and replacing one each time a color is empty and then calculate the inks lost to the waste ink pad say over three cycles and then use that as a base. This is what Canon expects someone to do. You will be subject to losing (0.4mlx8tanksx8colorsx3 cycles) = 76.8 ml.
Now contrast this to someone who will override the ink monitoring. Here you HAVE to assume the refiller has some content inside their head. Also an assumption will be made that you err on the side of caution and you refill at the time the tanks are HALF full. You will also top off ALL of them at the same time.
So essentially you will refill ALL of them 6 times by the time you reach the base situation. So how much ink has been directed to the waste pad? Let's do some math again. (0.4mlx8tanksx2refills per cycle/3 cycles) = 19.2ml
Now contrast the base stock OEM situation at 76.8ml vs 19.2 ml. If you were super conservative and refilled at 1/3rd down and performed the refill 3 times as often then you'd still end up at 28.8ml. You are welcome to manually perform all kinds of simulations and you will find that the margin where the refilling even with overidden chips is still ahead in saving ink in the vast majority of situations.

The huge disadvantage that the OEM situation has is that nobody throws out a partially used tank. As a result, they run each tank till it is empty and this causes a lot of waste ink as a result. When you refill and top off ALL the tanks at the same time, it is HUUGE leap in saving ink and that works in the favor of refilling. As a result, refillers will need to learn to top off ALL tanks at the same time and this can easily create LESS ink that if you were using a resetter and refilling one at a time when empty or even using Canon OEM tanks and replacing one at a time,
In fact the more ink channels there are in a printer the wider the margin of error exists. So on printers like the Pro-300, the margin and advantage of refilling ALL at the same time is even wider so more room for early refills exists.

In light of this a resetter is not a deal breaker but it would be a good thing to have if one is available.

QED.

 

[The Hat]

In light of this a resetter is not a deal breaker but it would be a good thing to have if one is available

It makes a huge difference to most Refillers… I can't fairly comment on the rest of your leap of faith, because I'm not an ink Retailer..