Tim, this was a very objective review. Any light that you can shed on my understanding that I provided below is greatly appreciated. Thanks. I bought a PRO-200 just under 4 years ago and I get great prints from it using luster, baryta, and matte papers. My considerations for choosing the PRO-200 were the build quality of the printer, paper sizes (up to A3+ and panos), ink formulation and number of colors, and my expected printing volumes and frequency. The Canon printers are built like tanks. I preferred dye over pigment inks because of my expected low volumes of printing with relatively long times between printing sessions. As I understand it, dye inks are solutions and pigment inks are emulsions or have emulsion- or suspension-like qualities. (Could you check with printer manufacturers to verify this?) The emulsion qualities of pigment inks appear to lead to programmed shaking of the tanks prior to printing to alleviate settling and higher frequency of nozzle clogging. I'm on my fifth set of ink cartridges and I have not experienced clogging as reported from running nozzle checks prior to each printing session. I have no intention of selling prints but what separates fine art prints from regular prints? Is it real, imagined, marketing, or a self-fulfilling prophecy? After much research I have not been able to understand the rationale for the characterization. Is there are true industry-accepted standard, or just what is disclosed during a sale? Having spent my >40-year career as a scientist I have come to understand that if there is no industry-accepted standard, there is no true basis for a "certification" of quality. As you reported in this video both Canon and Epson are estimating dye ink quality durations of approximately 100 years or greater, while pigment inks are estimated at 50% greater or more. With these durations, can one really tell and who really cares? Papers then become the basis for a this and the above statement of industry-accepted standards applies.
Great review. I've been considering a small format printer as a companion to the GP-4600S that I've just ordered. The Pro-200 might be it. Cheap to buy and not overly expensive to run. The alternative could have been an Epson ink tank printer, but although they are extremely cheap to run, I would have to make my own ICC profiles. Had one, didn't like it.
I had the Canon Pixma Pro 100 for nearly 8 years when I first seriously got into printing. I produced some lovely prints. When you starting out it would do well.
I have one of these and it's fantastic it makes very high quality prints in colour and B&W, yes the inks are pricey but it's a bullet proof piece of kit.
Hi Tim. Really good review that challenges what one wants from a printer. I guess for the enthusiast on a budget this hits the sweet spot. I think there is a point here about photography as a whole. It strikes me that by refusing to buy the latest and greatest cameras and lenses and taking a serious look at ones workflow output and what will happen to it. 150 years? Frankly nobody will give a flying one about any of my images nest week or after I've gone.
I looked at this on Canons website and there were at least 2 or 3 people who said this printer died prematurely and one review said Canon stated they no longer do repairs. The pro 300 is an extra $350, That’s pretty close to 2x so it is a substantial savings.
I have had a pro200 for a couple of years now. Very impressive prints and nice to use. One of my main concerns was ink coats, I can only imagine what they are like with a pro 1000/1100, let alone bigger printers. Have to buy them myself not a business so it is important for me
This stood out to me as well. And at around 8:40 you so both THAT as well as some blotchiness on the P-300 print in the yellows. Hard to say if those things are on-off on individual prints, or a 'thing'.
Hi Tim, I have had a PRO 100 for some years, from my very limited experience your custom profiles made a noticeable improvement for B&W less so for colour. I think another important consideration for these dye printers is their suitability for lower volume or infrequent printing; I have left my PRO-100 for months between printing sessions and it just starts up and performs. I know this costs me in ink as it goes through a cleaning cycle on start up but it has been trouble free. I read that pigment printers are not so tolerant of long rest periods. Is this still true?
![I Replaced ALL my ADOBE APPS with these [free or cheaper] Alternatives!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5EfqHg49kMk/mqdefault.jpg)
this was exactly the video i needed to see. so weird when it popped up
Tim, this was a very objective review. Any light that you can shed on my understanding that I provided below is greatly appreciated. Thanks.
I bought a PRO-200 just under 4 years ago and I get great prints from it using luster, baryta, and matte papers. My considerations for choosing the PRO-200 were the build quality of the printer, paper sizes (up to A3+ and panos), ink formulation and number of colors, and my expected printing volumes and frequency. The Canon printers are built like tanks. I preferred dye over pigment inks because of my expected low volumes of printing with relatively long times between printing sessions. As I understand it, dye inks are solutions and pigment inks are emulsions or have emulsion- or suspension-like qualities. (Could you check with printer manufacturers to verify this?) The emulsion qualities of pigment inks appear to lead to programmed shaking of the tanks prior to printing to alleviate settling and higher frequency of nozzle clogging. I'm on my fifth set of ink cartridges and I have not experienced clogging as reported from running nozzle checks prior to each printing session.
I have no intention of selling prints but what separates fine art prints from regular prints? Is it real, imagined, marketing, or a self-fulfilling prophecy? After much research I have not been able to understand the rationale for the characterization. Is there are true industry-accepted standard, or just what is disclosed during a sale? Having spent my >40-year career as a scientist I have come to understand that if there is no industry-accepted standard, there is no true basis for a "certification" of quality. As you reported in this video both Canon and Epson are estimating dye ink quality durations of approximately 100 years or greater, while pigment inks are estimated at 50% greater or more. With these durations, can one really tell and who really cares? Papers then become the basis for a this and the above statement of industry-accepted standards applies.
Great review. I've been considering a small format printer as a companion to the GP-4600S that I've just ordered. The Pro-200 might be it. Cheap to buy and not overly expensive to run. The alternative could have been an Epson ink tank printer, but although they are extremely cheap to run, I would have to make my own ICC profiles. Had one, didn't like it.
I had the Canon Pixma Pro 100 for nearly 8 years when I first seriously got into printing. I produced some lovely prints. When you starting out it would do well.
Love my pro200 using your NST and Lustre papers - plus Baryta 300 for BW it’s a real gem of a printer for hobbyists
I have one of these and it's fantastic it makes very high quality prints in colour and B&W, yes the inks are pricey but it's a bullet proof piece of kit.
Hi Tim.
Really good review that challenges what one wants from a printer.
I guess for the enthusiast on a budget this hits the sweet spot.
I think there is a point here about photography as a whole. It strikes me that by refusing to buy the latest and greatest cameras and lenses and taking a serious look at ones workflow output and what will happen to it.
150 years? Frankly nobody will give a flying one about any of my images nest week or after I've gone.
Found the pro 200 at 200€ new unused. Guess it's worth it no matter what. 1st photo printer.
I looked at this on Canons website and there were at least 2 or 3 people who said this printer died prematurely and one review said Canon stated they no longer do repairs. The pro 300 is an extra $350, That’s pretty close to 2x so it is a substantial savings.
7:25 Printer's famous last words:
"There is no place to hide when printing black & white" 😬
I have had a pro200 for a couple of years now. Very impressive prints and nice to use. One of my main concerns was ink coats, I can only imagine what they are like with a pro 1000/1100, let alone bigger printers. Have to buy them myself not a business so it is important for me
Print costs are less on the bigger printers. I don't understand your concerns. Same paper size = cheaper on the big ones...
Print-lines on the p-200 (hands near the wrists)
This stood out to me as well. And at around 8:40 you so both THAT as well as some blotchiness on the P-300 print in the yellows. Hard to say if those things are on-off on individual prints, or a 'thing'.
Hi Tim,
I have had a PRO 100 for some years, from my very limited experience your custom profiles made a noticeable improvement for B&W less so for colour.
I think another important consideration for these dye printers is their suitability for lower volume or infrequent printing; I have left my PRO-100 for months between printing sessions and it just starts up and performs. I know this costs me in ink as it goes through a cleaning cycle on start up but it has been trouble free.
I read that pigment printers are not so tolerant of long rest periods. Is this still true?
Sadly..mine failed - not worth repairing (out of warranty)