Thanks for bringing this up. I have tried both the Canon-PRO 300 for a year, and have eventually switched to the EPSON P700. To make the long story short: 1. If you have problems with print quality you are not doing it the right way, as there is no real difference in print quality. 2. If you choose the Canon, you have to deal with 14ml ink cassettes, and you will be replacing one of the many ink cartridges almost anytime you use the printer, therefore you always have to do a kind of cartridge stock management, and budget for the costs associated with it. If you want to use third-party inks, this is almost impossible from a practical point of view, as ink monitoring by weight is very impractical in this system. Re-filled ink cartridges cannot be reset in the Canon system in contrast to EPSON. 3. In the Canon, the printhead is way bigger than in the Epson to accomodate all the cartridges sittin on it. This means the printer is far bigger and wider. EPSON uses a very small printhead, connected to the larger cartridges with small flexible tubes. This construction principle brings a lot of advantages in terms of size and cartridge management. 4. The EPSON solves all problems related to 2. and 3: bigger cartridges, less cost per ml even with original inks, less cartridge waste, no problems using and refilling third-party inks, cartridge resetting possible, small and compact size..... Again, don´t bother about potential differences in print quality - in terms of practical aspects, EPSON is the clear winner.
canon is a japanese company , Epson is American. Is anything you have learn from high tech ,is that japanese tech in average last longer and is build in better quality. I have heard stories of people using their canon printers for a decade without problems.. while there who have a video , who explained major big problems with their epson 700 or 900 , forgot which one was, that had issues with Wireless connection and had to connect physically the printer with a cable to get good prints. also someone explained their Epson refused to print correctly with company officially drivers ,he had to use genenric windows ones to get it working. another majoor issue and a big one of epson is the availability of their inks.. You can buy CANON inks almost in every place ,even in wallmart or Walgreens drugstore while EPSON are more harder to find them. Epson have more ink their cartrige , no question about that ,but check the horror stories of EPSON printers Wiping all your ink automatically with "auto cleaning" after some time.. This means the user experience is far more predictable with canon printers ,than with Epson . That some users are saying EPSON p700 is wonderful when it works . So there is a guy who uploaded a video with 2 years using their epson sure color p900 /p700 and he was not very impressed with the troubleshooting that from time to time he needs to do to get it working. So in summary problems with Epson , are from buggy drivers ,to totally wiping your Ink cartridges automatically after months of use. One guy told he lost 5 cardtridges in just one autocleaning operation. So to call a printer the "clear winner" you need to also measure quality of the hardware ,if it breaks and require repairs or troubleshooting from time to time to get it work.. that can make a whole new differences , since most people will rather choose a canon p-300 over an epson p700 if give a lot less problems and troubleshooting and last longer. Canon is a way bigger company than Epson , and produce a lot more than printers,, they are leaders in Photography cameras too. and in a lot more electronics. Canon is like saying Sony.. a very big global company that is well know in the world.. Epson is only popular for inkjet printers mostly. Canon is a world leader in advancved electronics Cameras ,printers and more. When you buy Canon ,you are investing in a very prestigious brand ,that its products are more available in the market worldwide. So in summary you need to take into account Quality of the product.. how long it will last . What's the point in investing in something very expensive that breaks in a few months.? Also customer service is important too ,it give you peace of mind ,but no idea which company does better is customer support .
@@technoartfest8708are you just writing stuff randomly? Epson is not “American”. I owned multiple printers canons and epsons. Both are amazing. When it comes to cost effective/quality Epson is the one.
Hi :) The p700 is a recommended printer (in Facebook groups) for printing digital negatives because it has the ability to determine the density of the ink.. Does the pro 300 have a similar control on the ink? Thanks again! Your videos are excellent
While, Keith, you cannot discern differences between prints from these two printers and I really appreciate that, I looked at the differences in specifications in the past. Having put the specs next to each other, the following struck me. Both use 10 cartridges of the liquid gold type, but never use all 10 - the Epson uses 9 because it either uses Photo Black or Matte black, and the Canon uses 8 comparable pigment cartridges (it does not have Light Gray) but for certain papers squirts Chroma Optimizer as a surface correction over its prints. With the Epson at 5,760*1,440 and the Canon at 4,800*2,400, the difference in resolution to the naked eye is negligible, but what I cannot ignore is the minimum droplet size: Epson 1.5 picolitre and Canon 4 picolitre. If I multiply that maximum DPI resolution with the minimum droplet size, convert that to the number of 8"*10" prints I could theoretically get from that and convert that to a price in USD per 8"*10 for the liquid gold laid on the paper, then the Epson gets to $1.51 and the Canon to $3.33 (based on NY, NY super shop prices excluding sales tax). I cannot judge if this is a realistic scenario and we do not know how many droplets-over-each-other will be present in a real photograph in either case. But the difference in prices seems shocking. That price for Canon assumes zero Chroma Optimizer, by the way, and if we use a paper that needs it, then a relative lot more money is needed. So if these prices and calculations are correct, then the Epson costs $0.019 per square inch and the Canon $0.042. And if we print at that hypothetical ink density, then the 9 ink tanks in the Epson (assumed full) will be able to print 226 sheets of 8"*10" while the Canon with its much smaller cartridges and larger minimum droplet would give some 31 prints of 8"*10" - the latter seems very low to me and suggests something fishy is going on in these assumptions. So if the Canon with its 4pl droplets would never squirt at the full resolution then the price per 8"*10" would be better. The so-called DPI resolution is not saying the printer will print that many droplets, but merely says what the stepper motor step size is and with one droplet of 4 pl it may generate a relatively large blob in paper that prevents squirting at every step of the motor. The absence of light gray in the Canon might mean that it cannot create as subtle gradations, e.g. in black and white prints, but an extremely critical eye is likely needed to be able to see the difference. Another potentially significant difference is print speed. Canon specifies 165 seconds for an 8"*10" print and if I convert Epson's time for an 8.5"*11" to a hypothetical time for 8"*10" then this gives 76 seconds - again potentially fishy: Canon specifies some ISO norm here, I don't know about Epson. Finally, there is a ~big difference in size. The Epson with 515.6mm * 368.3mm * 185.4mm would need 35.2 litres of space in your office and for the Canon at 640mm * 381mm * 201mm you need 49 litres. That space is when the printer is closed or non-operational and when you print, the space requirements become for the Epson 515.6mm * 769.6mm * 419.1mm or 166.3 litres but the Canon then needs 640mm *838mm * 417mm and this is 223.6 litres of office space. While the Canon needs more space, it weighs less with 14.3 kg when the Epson weighs in at 16 kg. Or, if we cannot discern the results of these two then circumstantial evidence may drive a decision. An important aspect that I did not include in these comparisons - I have no hard data - is how much ink these printers squirt away after not having been used for an X amount of time - this drives the cost of ink up and for people who do not print often can become the highest cost in the TCO of owning and operating these printers. And, we can still compare longevity of the prints made with either if the Wilhelm institute tested both with the same paper. FTTB I'll stick to my old Epson 3880 - if only Epson had a compensation for the ink still in the 3880 in case I were to buy a P900.
Very true, but the gist of my video is that you have to study the reviews and specs to get a feel for which might be best or relevant for your own needs. Something you've done at vastly more length than most would ;-) Some of what you posit, I'd argue details with or question their relevance - but if it matters, well that's fine ;-) Some are largely irrelevant to most people - but to others they might be important - that's really why I'll never say one model is 'better' - just different ;-) BTW It's not quite true to say I cannot discern the difference, just that it is not at all obvious and will depend on paper/profiling and may not be visible at all to some people.
Hi Keith, I have watched a lot of your videos, and thanks for every time being so good at comparing or evaluating printers. What I like especially is that you continuously emphasize that there is no such thing as a "best" printer as it varies with one's requirements. So let me give you some background: I am an enthusiast photographer, near pro level, but I still need to get at it. I am at the stage where I now occasionally sell photos as well (I sold about 200 in the last 6 months). I mainly sell them printed, and I go to the nearest print shop, have them printed, and that's it. The quality of the print shop is 8 out of 10 times satisfactory, although I often see irregularities that my clients need to notice. Since I will be moving to a city where I need easy access to local print shops, I am considering buying a printer. Most prints have a maximum size of 13 by 19 inches. Most photos I sell are either birds or night city views. Furthermore, I print a lot for my benefit and put them on the walls or give them to family members and friends. All in all, I print approximately 10 to 15 large-format photos and 20 postcard-size photos a month, yet I don't intend to make a living with this. It is and will remain a hobby. Budget is not a constraint: I don't care how much that thing costs. Reliability, quality, low maintenance, and ease of operation are considerations. I need to be more experienced in using calibration tools and have little knowledge about color management. For editing, I use an Apple Studio display, which is consistent in color rendering, and the output is similar to the screen of my Macbook Pro 16-inch M1 Max. I hope this background information is enough for you to guide me on where to start my search for a printer that matches my needs and is good enough to cover any future needs I might develop as my proficiency increases. Your feedback would be highly appreciated.
I'd suggest you need a proper screen calibrator. The fact that the screen matches your laptop is is no significance -- for print -- The PRO-300 will give good results although the ink costs are higher than the 700 The other thing is to NOT rely on my videos! - they are supplements for the written reviews which get refined/updated over time, whereas the videos are unchanged - based usually on a single take with no script... www.northlight-images.co.uk/epson-sc-p700-printer-review/ www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon-pro-300-printer-review/ and one made before I started including videos www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon-pro-1000-printer-review/ Partly depends on your paper choices too. What I'm waiting for is the upcoming P5300 - the benefits of paper handling with the P5000 design, but the ink set of the P700/900 - not likely until the new year though.
Purchasing a printer today seems so confusing and I’m extremely happy there are people like yourself to help people navigate this minefield. If you wouldn’t mind I would love to get some advice. I’m looking to purchase a printer that I can be used to print on watercolour paper (gsm 300+). I’m looking to print my sketches at A3 which I can then paint so needs to use pigment ink. My sketches are all done digitally but look like traditional pencil outlines so no colour other than grayscale is used. Any recommendation is greatly appreciated.
Both 300 and 700 are pigment ink - the 700 is a bit cheaper to run. See the estimated print costs here for example www.redrivercatalog.com/rr/cost-of-inkjet-printing.html just remember that pigment ink or not- the paper needs to be one coated for inkjet printing.
Keith, whilst I love your paper reviews and discussions regarding how a certain paper works and what settings are best etc, you really do need to occasionally come off that fence and just plain say whether you prefer one printer over another and why. Constantly prevaricating about the definition of quality is fine and I realise you do not care much about either of these consumer printers (being a Pro) but it is a waste of time producing such a video that has no answer or decision? You are the ultimate fence sitter! Not sure whether this is not not upset Canon or Epson but a simple 'I would choose this over that for this/these reason's would suffice. I am sad to say a pointless video and one which I have watched about 5 times since published to absolutely convince myself you actually commit to nothing. Now for some fence sitting by me, this of course does not reflect on othesr videos and articles and opinions (like quality - haha) are varied and unquantifiable.
Sorry, but based on longstanding principles... When people ask for the 'best' printer I'll say get a P20000. When they complain about size I'll say get a P9500. When they complain about price, I'll then say get a P5000. When they complain about some aspect of that I'll say 'read the reviews'. When they just want me to recommend a printer, I'll say I don't sell printers. When they ask 'but which is best' I'll go back to the P20000 or send a link to the article which explains why, in 20 years of reviews, I never give scores, gold star awards or recommendations... So, no, [with very few exceptions*] I am not going to provide simple answers to people in answer to un-defined or ill-defined questions, just information to help them decide for themselves or codify/rank their own questions/criteria. *The ET-18100 vs ET-8550 comparison is a case where the differences are really obvious and the choice comes down to 'do you only want to print good looking colour photos on gloss/lustre photo paper BUT People who email me with specific printer related questions or issues will often get a very straight answer about which is best, but I'm afraid I'm never going to put this in a public guide, since the answer there is always 'it depends' and despite some people wanting me to 'just' tell them what to buy, I'm not going to. I accept this will annoy some people, but there is no shortage of other 'reviews' happy to make bold recommendations... I'm minded to suggest just picking the one backing the printer they really wanted ;-) :-)
@@KeithCooper Reading the comment and your reply, I think that many of us are beginners when starting to watch your videos, and although you don't like to compare, there is still one thing that could be done and would satisfy most. When you have 2 printers, you could pick 3 kinds of the mostly used paper (good quality gloss, luster and matte) and compare, say a rich colored landscape scene, with the 3 papers on both printers and tell us which one you prefer for each, or if they are indiscernable from one another, let us know alike, and show us the prints side by side. It would make six prints total, not the end of the world, and that would be talking for us beginner, because what kind of paper are we mainly going to use when we start ?.. Metallic and alike will be less common at first. But the three I mention will probably be our bread and butter... And a side by side visual is always so satisfying... ( I must admit that I would have loved to see that type of comparison in your P200 / P300 video where you show us random images of each printer but no visual of an identical color image printed on both. side by side, and here, with one being dye and the other pigment a side by side visual of a color rich toned print would have been nice to see, probably showing more differences than when comparing side by side dye or pigment only printers... (I know, we're vampires, you already do so much for us, many still in the stone age of printing knowledge...)
@@alanalain4884 When I get the P5300 here to test I'll try and do this with a comparison with the P5000. I'll not be doing it with smaller printers though - the differences are often minimal and also I rarely have two such printers here at the same time. Image choices on different papers often depend on personal tastes too - this is another reason I'm not greatly into making comparisons. I'm deliberately not go beyond fairly generic advice on paper vs image type for example. My opinions don't really matter one jot in this - I'm not doing the work for you ;-) I want people to make their own choices - almost any modern printer is capable of excellent results...
@@KeithCooper Thank you for your insight, Keith. I totally agree with you, it's just that for a newbie that wants to start right, it's slightly daunting with a lot to discover and embrace... Nothing binary there... More like an equation between printer, ink, paper, profiles...Feels like a wall you have to build not even knowing how to do concrete and which cement to use. Enthralling, and so are your videos...
I bought Canon TC-20 because it has CISS and a relatively large format. I print posters, photographs and reproductions of paintings on paper and canvas. I calibrated it and the color is quite accurate. If you print in A3+ format, the raster is not visible in real use. I just wonder how long the print head resource will last. Epson usually has more resources, but the printers are also much more expensive. For smaller formats I have an Epson L18050 (18100) and Epson L805
Hi Keith, great video. I understand that the image quality results are very close. However, how about the age old question of drying heads with Epson printers? I used to own a 44" Epson 9800 which drive me nuts with its drying head. I ended up selling it as I was not printing often enough to keep it in proper working order. How about ink usage? I have heard that Canon wastes a lot of ink in order to keep the printer in tip-top shape. What is your take on both issues? Thanks.
Ah - I'm minded to suggest the answer is in your question: 'age old question' ... much more true in the past ;-) For large format printers - Canon or Epson lack of use still causes issues. For desktop printers - it's quite different these days As to ink usage - I've seen no clear evidence either way. It's been suggested for the PRO-1000 ... very different printer to the 300
The newer EPSON printers after 2017 have an evolved print head that clogs less. Clogging is actually not as much of a problem with the current printer line.
Good conclusion Keith. I have the Pro 300 with no complaints but I have a question. I am very disciplined in keeping my monitor profiled and I create my own profiles for paper. I have 3 different papers that I use on a regular basis from the profiles I have created. Do you think new paper profiles should be created say every 6 months as a printer ages and possibly changes ?
No, not unless you are commercial contract proofing organisation and have the equipment with accuracy and tolerances sufficient for it to make a difference. For almost anyone else I'm going to suggest it is simply not necessary...
In Canada, The Epson P700 , costs $53/25ml each cartridge to replace. The Canon P300 costs $18/14.4ml each cartridge to replace. Canon seems better until you remember its nozzles use more ink and it runs out of ink faster. However, Epson P900 costs $61/50ml and Canon P1000 costs $75/80ml. Pigment is expensive but will last you. Dye ink is way cheaper like Epson ET8550 with ink tank and All in One capability, but does not last like pigment ink. Its never an easy choice.
Indeed - such figures vary widely by region and change. It's one reason I don't track precise ink costs. There are worth noting though if such costs matter [and to a proportion of users they don't]
I have had the epson p 700 for a little over 2 years. The prints are fantastic BUT; after about 11 months the printer decided on its own to try to clean the print head. It was stuck in the "start up" mode until it drained 5 of my ink cartridges at US $38 each. Epson did replace the printer quickly (not the ink) but then a year later the same thing happened but now it drained 8 ink cartridges. Epson refused to recognize the problem and said its out of warranty and will do nothing about it. The printer decision to clean the print head was right after a good print was made but before making another print, I needed to change a cartridge. It was after changing (I shut down printer to change) that it proceeded to drain 8 ink cartridges. I will not buy from epson again!
Wow that's insane. In the Netherlands each cartridge is €59,- Those automatic cleaning cycles would burn a hole in my pocket. After reading your comment I think an important factor is their customer support. I also read that it's easier to replace print heads with the Canon printer. I don't know, but helpful customer service would be very nice.
I wonder how long before we get open source ish printers with the ability to use third party software and SDKs , different ink types, hybrid features, or one which doesn’t require software and which can operate as a standalone unit. An AirPort Express for printers, if you will. I still find the printer space massively and unnecessarily complicated, and the review space is an exercise in frustration . Thanks for adding some sanity to this black box universe. Your channel’s wisdom is unparalleled, Keith.
Given the secret sauce of how inkjet printers represent colours, I think it very unlikely that such information will become available freely. Manufacturers can't even settle on a single model themselves, there's just so many variables.
Thanks - too much proprietary info locked up in those drivers I'm afraid. Too few people around with the expertise and skills to write good drivers for no return...
@@jonathand435 Thanks. I had no idea that there were proprietary factors at play. I suppose it’s similar to the obscure world of debayering and color temperature algorithms? I assumed printers were relatively dumb machines which translated information in a simple way. This is all equally fascinating as it is disappointing. Have there ever been any books or other points of information on what constitutes rich and vivid colors? I don’t know if this question makes any sense, but I would assume it’s a thing - whether that information is accessible or available is an entirely different matter, though I would have assumed it would be considering how long color science and research has been a thing. It makes sense from a business side of things to keep these secret sauces locked up, though I’m surprised they’ve managed to keep these secrets locked away . I’ve seen some threads on LUT and film emulation processes and my mind is blown by how complex that stuff is.
@@Dstonephoto Keith has a video on if more inks means better prints. It shows some of the differences, some using grey, orange, CMYK with lighter tones etc.
Question from the floor Keith, isn’t the main difference between Epson and Canon that the former prints its inks cold and Canon prints thermally? Or is that misinformation I’ve read elsewhere and does it make a difference anyway? ✌️🇦🇺
Yes, it's a difference... Just when this particular difference might make a meaningful difference is a much more open question. This is why Canon print heads are a user serviceable item for example. Some see this as an advantage, some don't ;-) Lots of 'marketing led uncertainty' in this area to be wary of...
Hi Keith! I have a question regarding printing contact negatives for alternative photo processes. I am in the process of choosing a photo printer for a wide range of uses, including normal black and white and colour prints, but I would also like to be able to produce high-quality digital negatives for alternative processes. Key requirements are compatibility with UV light exposure and ability to produce high negative density, required for some types of process. Given the above, are there any specific pros/cons with the P700 or PRO-300. Based on my research so far, there is some indication that the PRO-300 lays down more ink, but I have no idea if this is really true, or relevant to negative production. I have watched your ET-8550 transparencies video BTW, but that was specific to a different printer, so not sure how much that applies to the P-700.
This is an area I have not tested enough to answer. You need to find a forum where people actually do such stuff... There are several - QuadToneRIP for example. The needs of the process are different enough that my testing is of little direct relevance I'm afraid. From what I do know, I would likely want a printer just for negative production - that said, my darkroom became a normal room again 20+ years ago, so it's not an areas I plan on exploring ;-)
Thanks for the reply, Keith. I have been researching a bit more, and my general impression is that the alternative process folks tend towards using Epson printers. Not because Canon are inferior in any way, but because they tend to have better support in terms of specialised profiles etc. I was concerned about Epson print head clogging, but it does seem less of an issue with modern Epson printers. Also QuadToneRIP software, which seems to be the way to go, especially for the higher end alternative processes (platinum, palladium) only supports Epson. Anway - still more digging to do 😀
Hello. Hopefully, I can get help here. I'm looking to buy a printer for vehicle decals/stickers. I did a lot of research, but I just couldn't get to the conclusion. I need something that uses pigment based ink instead of dyed, because of the color fading, waterproofing and longevity of the decals. Based on my research, I recommended are these four models. Canon Pixma Pro 200 and 300 Epson ET 8500, 8550 or P700 Some information says that they all can use pigment ink, other only higher end versions - Canon Pro 300 and Epson P700. I also noticed that the Canon inks are more expensive than the Epson and have smaller capacity cartridges as well. Basically I'm into the cheaper versions on both of the brands, because my budget is tight, but I'm also open for your suggestions even for a different models and brands. Thank you!
None of the printers you mention are suitable for such printing. In fact I've never reviewed a desktop printer which would do this with OEM inks Maybe with 3rd party inks, one of the tank printers might do, but I don't test non OEM inks
For car stickers you should look at Dye sublimation printer, like the Epson F170. Dye sub. don't fade much. Can't post link but google the 5 best dye sublimation printers 2023. Gives some ideas.
I started looking over printers after watching a printing video a couple of weeks ago. Canon & Epson all the way up to over 30"-44" printers I believe). Beside looking at the max size paper & paper types, I started looking at the ink cartridge size & figuring out the $ pr ml which might actually be my deciding factor on my next printer giving me being just a hobbyist photographer. Probably take an awful lot of prints to make up the savings cost pr ml for say something like the SC P5000 over the SC P900 initial purchase price! But eventually, it might be worth it & definitely would be if you are a regular printer or paid pro.
Yes - those big printers need consistent regular use though. The matter of when printing becomes 'profitable' is a tricky one though at lower levels of printing.
Hi Keith, I run through a lot of your very informative videos and I'm slowly learning. In regards of the 2 printers you compare here, I read that the P700 has a resolution (dot per inch) of 5760X1440. whereas the P300 has a resolution of 4800X2400. As I am new to printing, I thought 300 dot per inch was the standard, so these numbers don't talk to me much, but are they an important factor to consider, or is it just marketing stuff on resolutions that are never used ? And if it is important, would you know why one would seem better than the other ? Thank you for any insight...
That dpi 'resolution' is for dots of ink of different colours [it's also 'marketing' info, so I often ignore it]. 300ppi is a common setting for 'image resolution'. Each of the image pixels is made of several smaller dots of ink. There is no 'better', just slightly different ;-) For a much more detailed explanation of what this actually means, see the info at www.northlight-images.co.uk/best-canon-pro-300-driver-settings/ This is from: www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon-pro-300-printer-review/ There is similar info for the P700 Remember - my videos are supplements to the written articles, not the other way round ;-)
Hi Keith, thank you for your time and insight. I also intend to read your articles and the links you provide. I warm up with your awesome videos though, which are already a mine of infos. Best... @@KeithCooper
As always a useful and informative video. You mentioned the P900 and pro 1000. Although you said they have more in common, a similar video on these two would be very helpful.
Thanks - problem is that I reviewed the pro-1000 8 years ago [5 years before I started doing videos] - I don't have any up to date testing. You'll have to read my detailed written reviews I'm afraid ;-) Maybe when a PRO-1000 replacement arrives...
Ah, for B&W you need to read the main [written] reviews and linked B&W articles www.northlight-images.co.uk/epson-sc-p700-printer-review/ www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon-pro-300-printer-review/ www.northlight-images.co.uk/black-and-white-printing-with-the-pro-300/ www.northlight-images.co.uk/black-and-white-printing-with-the-p700/
Hello Keith. I'm a photographer and recently looking to purchase a printer for output (pro300 or p700), my monitor is 100% srgb gamut and also has a spyder color comparator, if I purchase the pro300 how do I try to make sure that the output is consistent with the colors after posting on the monitor? My guess: Purchase a monitor with 100% Adobe rgb so as to cover cmyk and do the post color relatively consistent with the output color? Or can I achieve the same result with direct output from my existing monitor. Looking forward to your help!❤
The monitor doesn't matter that much, and nothing will cover commercial CMYK anyway ;-) I printed just fine for years with an sRGB monitor and good printer profiles Read both printer reviews - the videos are but supplements to the main [written] stuff... www.northlight-images.co.uk/photography-articles-and-reviews/printing-paper-reviews-articles/ Then, if you like videos, see my proper categorised index of topics, as opposed to the half baked options YT allows you ;-) www.northlight-images.co.uk/keith-cooper-photography-videos-index/
@@KeithCooper Thank you very much！it helps a lot . if my monitor have both 100% srgb and 100% DCI-P3 , dose mean that using DCI-P3 is better for print?
@@KeithCooper got it ~ :) but the DCI P3 is too warm that i don’t know why (even the srgb with d6500 calibration will become warmer) ,is this normal,please?
Warmer than what? How do you define 'too warm'? Look at a known test image and see what they look like - this is often a problem when people are used to overly bright and too blue monitors. Calibrate the monitor to its native gamut ~120cd/m2 and then go away and make a drink. Does it still look too warm? See some of my monitor calibration info www.northlight-images.co.uk/category/articles-and-reviews/datacolor/
Hi Keith, Are there photo printers that are not ink jet based that are worth looking into? If there are, what would be the advantages and disadvantages? Thanks
Dye sub photo printers - used for event photo printing and the like Expensive to buy, expensive consumables and limited print sizes. Other than that, nothing occurs to me at any significant quality level. Colour lasers are a non starter in this area, unless they have changed dramatically of late.
Why wouldn’t you want an inkjet? The advantages are massive, even in office use inkjet has evolved massively to the point where laser printers are ancient technology
I own/use the Canon Pro-100 and satisfied with the output except with 1 are: the prints/ink seem to begin to fade after 4 years and accelerate after 6 years especially in direct and indirect sun light. I'm struggling to decide if the Pro-300 would be worth the cost increase to replace. Pro Canon or Hahnemuhle photo paper is used.
it depends... Like most things like this there is no simple answer I could ever give. See these: www.northlight-images.co.uk/black-and-white-printing-with-the-pro-300/ www.northlight-images.co.uk/black-and-white-printing-with-the-p700/ Anyone saying one is best without specifying exactly what they are testing is, at best, plain wrong ;-)
Your question requires long term testing, with a variety of usage scenarios. As such it's something I specifically cannot address in my testing since I get new printers on loan and I am not allowed to live in a printer warehouse... ;-) That said - I left a 300 for six months and it needed just a single nozzle check/clean
Hi Keith, Useful video for this PRO 300 user. An issue that I seem to have is that I use Professional Print and Layout as a plugin from Lightroom. In Lightroom I have the PPI set to 300 (standard for Canon I'm led to believe). In PPL every image I work on has a default of 240 dpi as the resolution. Is there any way (or indeed, any need) to change this in PPL? I know that DPI and and PPI are different but I'm not sure why it can't be customized. Thanks in advance.
This is a tricky one since I never use Lightroom - my printing is either direct or from photoshop, where I've set the image size as part of my editing. Also 300 is no 'standard' - just a long lasting bit of 'perceived wisdom' much over due for retirement IMHO ;-) :-) Check my main [written] PRO-300 review - there is a link to another article looking at optimal print resolutions www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon-pro-300-printer-review/ For the Canon software I'd suggest asking on the printing forum at DPReview.com - Lightroom users live there ;-)
Difference between Canon pro 300 and the Epson p700 you say, is almost indiscernible and both being pigment ink printers. Well what about both those printers results compared to an Epson ET8550 and Canon pro 200 both dye ink printers of course but with one little caveat, in that you print on a fine art baryta satin and a fine art pearl (Hahnemuhle) on the et8550, as these papers are more in keeping with what the pigment ink produces. Would you be able to tell the difference on a blind test. Just asking Kind regards Mark
If I knew the image and the paper ...maybe I'd expect better performance on the PRO-200 because of the number of inks compared the the 5 dyes of the 8550 Not a comparison I've ever done though
If you can't tell which one is better, then may be you should have talked about there known issues, like misalignment, lines in prints, charging paper, connexion... ;)
Ah, but what known issues? ;-) This video is based on my direct experience in testing and reviewing printers when the printers first came out [2020]. Unfortunately, videos are set in stone, so unlike any written article, I can't got back and add updates or notes. However, a bigger problem is that I have never seen many of these 'issues', so for me, they simply are not "known issues" at all. An ongoing problem with limited test data, and not living in a warehouse of test printers ;-)
@@KeithCooperi've read that this printer can print default ligns , don't know how oftne it happens. I'm hesitating between Canon pro 300, Epson P700 for pigment ink printer and Epson ET 8550 for dye ink...
How about epson et 8550 vs Canon pro 300? I know they are very different beasts, but I'm struggling with the running cost of the Canon pro 300 or epson p700 vs et8550
Sorry, I don't ever do detailed inter-brand comparisons [a 20 year review writing principle], but the differences are all to do with the inks For people who really worry about ink costs, the Epson tank printers win easily, but good results depend on paper choices and profiling. Canon paper handling in the A3+ printers is generally better.
Did you already make a choice? Because I've bought the ET 8550 and I'm going to return it. Rollermarks, smudges, the colours are off. Did many many testprints, all kind of paper, different profiles and I'm just not impressed by the print quality on glossy paper, linework details are foggy. They don't sell 350gr. paper, they say that it can handle 1,3mm (845grams) but don't support other brands. The front tray is slow (6 sec. ) while you can't access the tray below it, while you want to switch papers. Not the end of the world but annoying for sure. The front tray is badly designed with a part that sticks out. Prints on plain paper are worse than my office printers, probably because of the ink, I don't know, but it's not worth it. Also I read that the ink only last a couple of months unframed, it will fade quickly, so I will try canon pro 300 for better paper options, icc profiles and fade resistant ink. Mind you I've had an Epson printer for 10 years that worked just fine. Right now: I stay away from Ecotanks!
my "problem" at the moment is; I would like to buy one of these printers, but don't know if it would be worth it - cost wise. Not being a professional (and not being someone who shoots stacks of images anyway) I might only print 1 photo a month and some months nothing at all. Would these printers (or equivalent) still function if not used very much? would I be forever refilling ink thats dried up? I know you've done some good videos already on this subject but I would guess as a proper professional you don't really have this problem.
Yes - a nozzle check page on plain paper will suffice - I like to do something like this every few weeks - or, for larger printers every week [P5000 for example]
@@KeithCooper there lovey papers, the satin being slightly warmer but you are correct , very image dependent but very smooth results after i got the hang of things, sure Im still only a kid with regards digital printing😇😉
Ah, not so odd?... Canon in the US have a history of deeply discounting printers in this category [100/10] so I would expect it to occur in the 200/300 line at some point.
@@KeithCooper sorry, referring to running cost. I didn't realize the pro 200 is dye ink. I'm between the 200 and 300. I do mostly black-and-white so I think I'm dropping the ET 8550 as an option. But I hear with a paper profile it can get quite good. Pulling my hair out!!
See my written reviews on the Northlight site - all have specific B&W sections. My videos are generally supplements to the written ones - which are where the real detail goes Links from here: www.northlight-images.co.uk/photography-articles-and-reviews/printing-paper-reviews-articles/
Wow, this should be a SNL skit. You gave an opinion about opinions. Haha. Genius. It does however make the title of the video misleading in the end. What does that really mean? Misleading? To one person it could be misleading to another it could be insightful, who am I to judge, and at different points in one’s life, it could represent a point of view that could be the opposite of an opinion held in the future or in the past. We’ll need to understand the context.
Thank you Keith for as another informative video. I have read your articles relating to both printers. I would liike to ask a few questions relating to both printers or potentially relating to other printer choices. Could I email you please?
Hi Keith, no I won't ask which is best. I only want to explain my need and situation and some advice, if that is okay? I would prefer to email, I can't see your email contact anywhere. Thank you
@@KeithCooper I had a look there but I could not find the contact details Keith. It is probably just me, I can't see things that are in front of me at times!
Thanks for bringing this up. I have tried both the Canon-PRO 300 for a year, and have eventually switched to the EPSON P700. To make the long story short:
1. If you have problems with print quality you are not doing it the right way, as there is no real difference in print quality.
2. If you choose the Canon, you have to deal with 14ml ink cassettes, and you will be replacing one of the many ink cartridges almost anytime you use the printer, therefore you always have to do a kind of cartridge stock management, and budget for the costs associated with it. If you want to use third-party inks, this is almost impossible from a practical point of view, as ink monitoring by weight is very impractical in this system. Re-filled ink cartridges cannot be reset in the Canon system in contrast to EPSON.
3. In the Canon, the printhead is way bigger than in the Epson to accomodate all the cartridges sittin on it. This means the printer is far bigger and wider. EPSON uses a very small printhead, connected to the larger cartridges with small flexible tubes. This construction principle brings a lot of advantages in terms of size and cartridge management.
4. The EPSON solves all problems related to 2. and 3: bigger cartridges, less cost per ml even with original inks, less cartridge waste, no problems using and refilling third-party inks, cartridge resetting possible, small and compact size.....
Again, don´t bother about potential differences in print quality - in terms of practical aspects, EPSON is the clear winner.
Thanks - that's an excellent look at those reasons for making a choice
In Canada Canon will send you ink before it depletes with there Auto Ink program, not sure how that will reflect on the cost though.
canon is a japanese company , Epson is American. Is anything you have learn from high tech ,is that japanese tech in average last longer and is build in better quality. I have heard stories of people using their canon printers for a decade without problems.. while there who have a video , who explained major big problems with their epson 700 or 900 , forgot which one was, that had issues with Wireless connection and had to connect physically the printer with a cable to get good prints. also someone explained their Epson refused to print correctly with company officially drivers ,he had to use genenric windows ones to get it working. another majoor issue and a big one of epson is the availability of their inks.. You can buy CANON inks almost in every place ,even in wallmart or Walgreens drugstore while EPSON are more harder to find them. Epson have more ink their cartrige , no question about that ,but check the horror stories of EPSON printers Wiping all your ink automatically with "auto cleaning" after some time.. This means the user experience is far more predictable with canon printers ,than with Epson . That some users are saying EPSON p700 is wonderful when it works . So there is a guy who uploaded a video with 2 years using their epson sure color p900 /p700 and he was not very impressed with the troubleshooting that from time to time he needs to do to get it working. So in summary problems with Epson , are from buggy drivers ,to totally wiping your Ink cartridges automatically after months of use. One guy told he lost 5 cardtridges in just one autocleaning operation. So to call a printer the "clear winner" you need to also measure quality of the hardware ,if it breaks and require repairs or troubleshooting from time to time to get it work.. that can make a whole new differences , since most people will rather choose a canon p-300 over an epson p700 if give a lot less problems and troubleshooting and last longer. Canon is a way bigger company than Epson , and produce a lot more than printers,, they are leaders in Photography cameras too. and in a lot more electronics. Canon is like saying Sony.. a very big global company that is well know in the world.. Epson is only popular for inkjet printers mostly. Canon is a world leader in advancved electronics Cameras ,printers and more. When you buy Canon ,you are investing in a very prestigious brand ,that its products are more available in the market worldwide. So in summary you need to take into account Quality of the product.. how long it will last . What's the point in investing in something very expensive that breaks in a few months.? Also customer service is important too ,it give you peace of mind ,but no idea which company does better is customer support .
@@technoartfest8708are you just writing stuff randomly? Epson is not “American”. I owned multiple printers canons and epsons. Both are amazing. When it comes to cost effective/quality Epson is the one.
Hi :) The p700 is a recommended printer (in Facebook groups) for printing digital negatives because it has the ability to determine the density of the ink.. Does the pro 300 have a similar control on the ink? Thanks again! Your videos are excellent
While, Keith, you cannot discern differences between prints from these two printers and I really appreciate that, I looked at the differences in specifications in the past. Having put the specs next to each other, the following struck me.
Both use 10 cartridges of the liquid gold type, but never use all 10 - the Epson uses 9 because it either uses Photo Black or Matte black, and the Canon uses 8 comparable pigment cartridges (it does not have Light Gray) but for certain papers squirts Chroma Optimizer as a surface correction over its prints.
With the Epson at 5,760*1,440 and the Canon at 4,800*2,400, the difference in resolution to the naked eye is negligible, but what I cannot ignore is the minimum droplet size: Epson 1.5 picolitre and Canon 4 picolitre. If I multiply that maximum DPI resolution with the minimum droplet size, convert that to the number of 8"*10" prints I could theoretically get from that and convert that to a price in USD per 8"*10 for the liquid gold laid on the paper, then the Epson gets to $1.51 and the Canon to $3.33 (based on NY, NY super shop prices excluding sales tax). I cannot judge if this is a realistic scenario and we do not know how many droplets-over-each-other will be present in a real photograph in either case. But the difference in prices seems shocking. That price for Canon assumes zero Chroma Optimizer, by the way, and if we use a paper that needs it, then a relative lot more money is needed. So if these prices and calculations are correct, then the Epson costs $0.019 per square inch and the Canon $0.042. And if we print at that hypothetical ink density, then the 9 ink tanks in the Epson (assumed full) will be able to print 226 sheets of 8"*10" while the Canon with its much smaller cartridges and larger minimum droplet would give some 31 prints of 8"*10" - the latter seems very low to me and suggests something fishy is going on in these assumptions. So if the Canon with its 4pl droplets would never squirt at the full resolution then the price per 8"*10" would be better. The so-called DPI resolution is not saying the printer will print that many droplets, but merely says what the stepper motor step size is and with one droplet of 4 pl it may generate a relatively large blob in paper that prevents squirting at every step of the motor.
The absence of light gray in the Canon might mean that it cannot create as subtle gradations, e.g. in black and white prints, but an extremely critical eye is likely needed to be able to see the difference.
Another potentially significant difference is print speed. Canon specifies 165 seconds for an 8"*10" print and if I convert Epson's time for an 8.5"*11" to a hypothetical time for 8"*10" then this gives 76 seconds - again potentially fishy: Canon specifies some ISO norm here, I don't know about Epson.
Finally, there is a ~big difference in size. The Epson with 515.6mm * 368.3mm * 185.4mm would need 35.2 litres of space in your office and for the Canon at 640mm * 381mm * 201mm you need 49 litres. That space is when the printer is closed or non-operational and when you print, the space requirements become for the Epson 515.6mm * 769.6mm * 419.1mm or 166.3 litres but the Canon then needs 640mm *838mm * 417mm and this is 223.6 litres of office space. While the Canon needs more space, it weighs less with 14.3 kg when the Epson weighs in at 16 kg.
Or, if we cannot discern the results of these two then circumstantial evidence may drive a decision.
An important aspect that I did not include in these comparisons - I have no hard data - is how much ink these printers squirt away after not having been used for an X amount of time - this drives the cost of ink up and for people who do not print often can become the highest cost in the TCO of owning and operating these printers.
And, we can still compare longevity of the prints made with either if the Wilhelm institute tested both with the same paper.
FTTB I'll stick to my old Epson 3880 - if only Epson had a compensation for the ink still in the 3880 in case I were to buy a P900.
Very true, but the gist of my video is that you have to study the reviews and specs to get a feel for which might be best or relevant for your own needs.
Something you've done at vastly more length than most would ;-) Some of what you posit, I'd argue details with or question their relevance - but if it matters, well that's fine ;-)
Some are largely irrelevant to most people - but to others they might be important - that's really why I'll never say one model is 'better' - just different ;-)
BTW It's not quite true to say I cannot discern the difference, just that it is not at all obvious and will depend on paper/profiling and may not be visible at all to some people.
Hi Keith, I have watched a lot of your videos, and thanks for every time being so good at comparing or evaluating printers. What I like especially is that you continuously emphasize that there is no such thing as a "best" printer as it varies with one's requirements. So let me give you some background: I am an enthusiast photographer, near pro level, but I still need to get at it. I am at the stage where I now occasionally sell photos as well (I sold about 200 in the last 6 months). I mainly sell them printed, and I go to the nearest print shop, have them printed, and that's it.
The quality of the print shop is 8 out of 10 times satisfactory, although I often see irregularities that my clients need to notice. Since I will be moving to a city where I need easy access to local print shops, I am considering buying a printer. Most prints have a maximum size of 13 by 19 inches. Most photos I sell are either birds or night city views. Furthermore, I print a lot for my benefit and put them on the walls or give them to family members and friends.
All in all, I print approximately 10 to 15 large-format photos and 20 postcard-size photos a month, yet I don't intend to make a living with this. It is and will remain a hobby.
Budget is not a constraint: I don't care how much that thing costs.
Reliability, quality, low maintenance, and ease of operation are considerations. I need to be more experienced in using calibration tools and have little knowledge about color management. For editing, I use an Apple Studio display, which is consistent in color rendering, and the output is similar to the screen of my Macbook Pro 16-inch M1 Max.
I hope this background information is enough for you to guide me on where to start my search for a printer that matches my needs and is good enough to cover any future needs I might develop as my proficiency increases.
Your feedback would be highly appreciated.
I'd suggest you need a proper screen calibrator. The fact that the screen matches your laptop is is no significance -- for print --
The PRO-300 will give good results although the ink costs are higher than the 700
The other thing is to NOT rely on my videos! - they are supplements for the written reviews which get refined/updated over time, whereas the videos are unchanged - based usually on a single take with no script...
www.northlight-images.co.uk/epson-sc-p700-printer-review/
www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon-pro-300-printer-review/
and one made before I started including videos
www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon-pro-1000-printer-review/
Partly depends on your paper choices too.
What I'm waiting for is the upcoming P5300 - the benefits of paper handling with the P5000 design, but the ink set of the P700/900 - not likely until the new year though.
@@KeithCooper Thanks much appreciated
Purchasing a printer today seems so confusing and I’m extremely happy there are people like yourself to help people navigate this minefield. If you wouldn’t mind I would love to get some advice. I’m looking to purchase a printer that I can be used to print on watercolour paper (gsm 300+). I’m looking to print my sketches at A3 which I can then paint so needs to use pigment ink. My sketches are all done digitally but look like traditional pencil outlines so no colour other than grayscale is used. Any recommendation is greatly appreciated.
Both 300 and 700 are pigment ink - the 700 is a bit cheaper to run.
See the estimated print costs here for example
www.redrivercatalog.com/rr/cost-of-inkjet-printing.html
just remember that pigment ink or not- the paper needs to be one coated for inkjet printing.
Keith, whilst I love your paper reviews and discussions regarding how a certain paper works and what settings are best etc, you really do need to occasionally come off that fence and just plain say whether you prefer one printer over another and why. Constantly prevaricating about the definition of quality is fine and I realise you do not care much about either of these consumer printers (being a Pro) but it is a waste of time producing such a video that has no answer or decision? You are the ultimate fence sitter! Not sure whether this is not not upset Canon or Epson but a simple 'I would choose this over that for this/these reason's would suffice. I am sad to say a pointless video and one which I have watched about 5 times since published to absolutely convince myself you actually commit to nothing. Now for some fence sitting by me, this of course does not reflect on othesr videos and articles and opinions (like quality - haha) are varied and unquantifiable.
Sorry, but based on longstanding principles...
When people ask for the 'best' printer I'll say get a P20000. When they complain about size I'll say get a P9500. When they complain about price, I'll then say get a P5000. When they complain about some aspect of that I'll say 'read the reviews'. When they just want me to recommend a printer, I'll say I don't sell printers. When they ask 'but which is best' I'll go back to the P20000 or send a link to the article which explains why, in 20 years of reviews, I never give scores, gold star awards or recommendations...
So, no, [with very few exceptions*] I am not going to provide simple answers to people in answer to un-defined or ill-defined questions, just information to help them decide for themselves or codify/rank their own questions/criteria.
*The ET-18100 vs ET-8550 comparison is a case where the differences are really obvious and the choice comes down to 'do you only want to print good looking colour photos on gloss/lustre photo paper
BUT People who email me with specific printer related questions or issues will often get a very straight answer about which is best, but I'm afraid I'm never going to put this in a public guide, since the answer there is always 'it depends' and despite some people wanting me to 'just' tell them what to buy, I'm not going to.
I accept this will annoy some people, but there is no shortage of other 'reviews' happy to make bold recommendations... I'm minded to suggest just picking the one backing the printer they really wanted ;-) :-)
@@KeithCooper Reading the comment and your reply, I think that many of us are beginners when starting to watch your videos, and although you don't like to compare, there is still one thing that could be done and would satisfy most. When you have 2 printers, you could pick 3 kinds of the mostly used paper (good quality gloss, luster and matte) and compare, say a rich colored landscape scene, with the 3 papers on both printers and tell us which one you prefer for each, or if they are indiscernable from one another, let us know alike, and show us the prints side by side.
It would make six prints total, not the end of the world, and that would be talking for us beginner, because what kind of paper are we mainly going to use when we start ?.. Metallic and alike will be less common at first. But the three I mention will probably be our bread and butter...
And a side by side visual is always so satisfying... ( I must admit that I would have loved to see that type of comparison in your P200 / P300 video where you show us random images of each printer but no visual of an identical color image printed on both. side by side, and here, with one being dye and the other pigment a side by side visual of a color rich toned print would have been nice to see, probably showing more differences than when comparing side by side dye or pigment only printers... (I know, we're vampires, you already do so much for us, many still in the stone age of printing knowledge...)
@@alanalain4884 When I get the P5300 here to test I'll try and do this with a comparison with the P5000.
I'll not be doing it with smaller printers though - the differences are often minimal and also I rarely have two such printers here at the same time.
Image choices on different papers often depend on personal tastes too - this is another reason I'm not greatly into making comparisons.
I'm deliberately not go beyond fairly generic advice on paper vs image type for example. My opinions don't really matter one jot in this - I'm not doing the work for you ;-) I want people to make their own choices - almost any modern printer is capable of excellent results...
@@KeithCooper Thank you for your insight, Keith. I totally agree with you, it's just that for a newbie that wants to start right, it's slightly daunting with a lot to discover and embrace... Nothing binary there... More like an equation between printer, ink, paper, profiles...Feels like a wall you have to build not even knowing how to do concrete and which cement to use. Enthralling, and so are your videos...
Before Christmas I bought a Canon P300 partly because there was one in stock at a camera store I like. --BAK--
yes - a very solid and capable printer
I bought Canon TC-20 because it has CISS and a relatively large format. I print posters, photographs and reproductions of paintings on paper and canvas. I calibrated it and the color is quite accurate. If you print in A3+ format, the raster is not visible in real use. I just wonder how long the print head resource will last. Epson usually has more resources, but the printers are also much more expensive. For smaller formats I have an Epson L18050 (18100) and Epson L805
Yes, the TC-20M is an interesting option, subject to the assorted caveats I mention in the review [eg no borderless, A3 max sheet]
Hi Keith, great video. I understand that the image quality results are very close. However, how about the age old question of drying heads with Epson printers? I used to own a 44" Epson 9800 which drive me nuts with its drying head. I ended up selling it as I was not printing often enough to keep it in proper working order. How about ink usage? I have heard that Canon wastes a lot of ink in order to keep the printer in tip-top shape. What is your take on both issues? Thanks.
Ah - I'm minded to suggest the answer is in your question: 'age old question' ... much more true in the past ;-)
For large format printers - Canon or Epson lack of use still causes issues.
For desktop printers - it's quite different these days
As to ink usage - I've seen no clear evidence either way. It's been suggested for the PRO-1000 ... very different printer to the 300
@@KeithCooper Thank you Keith.
The newer EPSON printers after 2017 have an evolved print head that clogs less. Clogging is actually not as much of a problem with the current printer line.
Good conclusion Keith. I have the Pro 300 with no complaints but I have a question. I am very disciplined in keeping my monitor profiled and I create my own profiles for paper. I have 3 different papers that I use on a regular basis from the profiles I have created. Do you think new paper profiles should be created say every 6 months as a printer ages and possibly changes ?
No, not unless you are commercial contract proofing organisation and have the equipment with accuracy and tolerances sufficient for it to make a difference.
For almost anyone else I'm going to suggest it is simply not necessary...
In Canada, The Epson P700 , costs $53/25ml each cartridge to replace. The Canon P300 costs $18/14.4ml each cartridge to replace. Canon seems better until you remember its nozzles use more ink and it runs out of ink faster.
However, Epson P900 costs $61/50ml and Canon P1000 costs $75/80ml.
Pigment is expensive but will last you. Dye ink is way cheaper like Epson ET8550 with ink tank and All in One capability, but does not last like pigment ink. Its never an easy choice.
Indeed - such figures vary widely by region and change. It's one reason I don't track precise ink costs. There are worth noting though if such costs matter [and to a proportion of users they don't]
I have had the epson p 700 for a little over 2 years. The prints are fantastic BUT; after about 11 months the printer decided on its own to try to clean the print head. It was stuck in the "start up" mode until it drained 5 of my ink cartridges at US $38 each. Epson did replace the printer quickly (not the ink) but then a year later the same thing happened but now it drained 8 ink cartridges. Epson refused to recognize the problem and said its out of warranty and will do nothing about it. The printer decision to clean the print head was right after a good print was made but before making another print, I needed to change a cartridge. It was after changing (I shut down printer to change) that it proceeded to drain 8 ink cartridges. I will not buy from epson again!
Sorry to hear that - does not sound like a very good business attitude - which division of Epson was it?
@@KeithCooper Epson USA
@@stevehayre2697 Thanks - Unfortunately, I have no connections with them. All my dealings are with Epson UK
Wow that's insane. In the Netherlands each cartridge is €59,- Those automatic cleaning cycles would burn a hole in my pocket. After reading your comment I think an important factor is their customer support. I also read that it's easier to replace print heads with the Canon printer. I don't know, but helpful customer service would be very nice.
I wonder how long before we get open source ish printers with the ability to use third party software and SDKs , different ink types, hybrid features, or one which doesn’t require software and which can operate as a standalone unit. An AirPort Express for printers, if you will. I still find the printer space massively and unnecessarily complicated, and the review space is an exercise in frustration . Thanks for adding some sanity to this black box universe. Your channel’s wisdom is unparalleled, Keith.
Do you mean these options after the warranty is over?
Given the secret sauce of how inkjet printers represent colours, I think it very unlikely that such information will become available freely.
Manufacturers can't even settle on a single model themselves, there's just so many variables.
Thanks - too much proprietary info locked up in those drivers I'm afraid.
Too few people around with the expertise and skills to write good drivers for no return...
@@jonathand435 Thanks. I had no idea that there were proprietary factors at play. I suppose it’s similar to the obscure world of debayering and color temperature algorithms? I assumed printers were relatively dumb machines which translated information in a simple way. This is all equally fascinating as it is disappointing. Have there ever been any books or other points of information on what constitutes rich and vivid colors? I don’t know if this question makes any sense, but I would assume it’s a thing - whether that information is accessible or available is an entirely different matter, though I would have assumed it would be considering how long color science and research has been a thing. It makes sense from a business side of things to keep these secret sauces locked up, though I’m surprised they’ve managed to keep these secrets locked away . I’ve seen some threads on LUT and film emulation processes and my mind is blown by how complex that stuff is.
@@Dstonephoto Keith has a video on if more inks means better prints. It shows some of the differences, some using grey, orange, CMYK with lighter tones etc.
Question from the floor Keith, isn’t the main difference between Epson and Canon that the former prints its inks cold and Canon prints thermally? Or is that misinformation I’ve read elsewhere and does it make a difference anyway? ✌️🇦🇺
Yes, it's a difference...
Just when this particular difference might make a meaningful difference is a much more open question.
This is why Canon print heads are a user serviceable item for example.
Some see this as an advantage, some don't ;-)
Lots of 'marketing led uncertainty' in this area to be wary of...
Hi Keith! I have a question regarding printing contact negatives for alternative photo processes.
I am in the process of choosing a photo printer for a wide range of uses, including normal black and white and colour prints, but I would also like to be able to produce high-quality digital negatives for alternative processes. Key requirements are compatibility with UV light exposure and ability to produce high negative density, required for some types of process.
Given the above, are there any specific pros/cons with the P700 or PRO-300. Based on my research so far, there is some indication that the PRO-300 lays down more ink, but I have no idea if this is really true, or relevant to negative production.
I have watched your ET-8550 transparencies video BTW, but that was specific to a different printer, so not sure how much that applies to the P-700.
This is an area I have not tested enough to answer. You need to find a forum where people actually do such stuff... There are several - QuadToneRIP for example.
The needs of the process are different enough that my testing is of little direct relevance I'm afraid.
From what I do know, I would likely want a printer just for negative production - that said, my darkroom became a normal room again 20+ years ago, so it's not an areas I plan on exploring ;-)
Thanks for the reply, Keith. I have been researching a bit more, and my general impression is that the alternative process folks tend towards using Epson printers. Not because Canon are inferior in any way, but because they tend to have better support in terms of specialised profiles etc.
I was concerned about Epson print head clogging, but it does seem less of an issue with modern Epson printers.
Also QuadToneRIP software, which seems to be the way to go, especially for the higher end alternative processes (platinum, palladium) only supports Epson.
Anway - still more digging to do 😀
Hello.
Hopefully, I can get help here.
I'm looking to buy a printer for vehicle decals/stickers.
I did a lot of research, but I just couldn't get to the conclusion.
I need something that uses pigment based ink instead of dyed, because of the color fading, waterproofing and longevity of the decals.
Based on my research, I recommended are these four models.
Canon Pixma Pro 200 and 300
Epson ET 8500, 8550 or P700
Some information says that they all can use pigment ink, other only higher end versions - Canon Pro 300 and Epson P700.
I also noticed that the Canon inks are more expensive than the Epson and have smaller capacity cartridges as well.
Basically I'm into the cheaper versions on both of the brands, because my budget is tight, but I'm also open for your suggestions even for a different models and brands.
Thank you!
None of the printers you mention are suitable for such printing. In fact I've never reviewed a desktop printer which would do this with OEM inks
Maybe with 3rd party inks, one of the tank printers might do, but I don't test non OEM inks
For car stickers you should look at Dye sublimation printer, like the Epson F170. Dye sub. don't fade much. Can't post link but google the 5 best dye sublimation printers 2023. Gives some ideas.
I started looking over printers after watching a printing video a couple of weeks ago. Canon & Epson all the way up to over 30"-44" printers I believe). Beside looking at the max size paper & paper types, I started looking at the ink cartridge size & figuring out the $ pr ml which might actually be my deciding factor on my next printer giving me being just a hobbyist photographer. Probably take an awful lot of prints to make up the savings cost pr ml for say something like the SC P5000 over the SC P900 initial purchase price! But eventually, it might be worth it & definitely would be if you are a regular printer or paid pro.
Yes - those big printers need consistent regular use though.
The matter of when printing becomes 'profitable' is a tricky one though at lower levels of printing.
Hi Keith, I run through a lot of your very informative videos and I'm slowly learning. In regards of the 2 printers you compare here, I read that the P700 has a resolution (dot per inch) of 5760X1440. whereas the P300 has a resolution of 4800X2400. As I am new to printing, I thought 300 dot per inch was the standard, so these numbers don't talk to me much, but are they an important factor to consider, or is it just marketing stuff on resolutions that are never used ? And if it is important, would you know why one would seem better than the other ? Thank you for any insight...
That dpi 'resolution' is for dots of ink of different colours [it's also 'marketing' info, so I often ignore it].
300ppi is a common setting for 'image resolution'. Each of the image pixels is made of several smaller dots of ink.
There is no 'better', just slightly different ;-)
For a much more detailed explanation of what this actually means, see the info at
www.northlight-images.co.uk/best-canon-pro-300-driver-settings/
This is from:
www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon-pro-300-printer-review/
There is similar info for the P700
Remember - my videos are supplements to the written articles, not the other way round ;-)
Hi Keith, thank you for your time and insight. I also intend to read your articles and the links you provide. I warm up with your awesome videos though, which are already a mine of infos. Best... @@KeithCooper
As always a useful and informative video. You mentioned the P900 and pro 1000. Although you said they have more in common, a similar video on these two would be very helpful.
Thanks - problem is that I reviewed the pro-1000 8 years ago [5 years before I started doing videos] - I don't have any up to date testing.
You'll have to read my detailed written reviews I'm afraid ;-)
Maybe when a PRO-1000 replacement arrives...
@@KeithCooper thanks. I’ll enjoy reading the full reviews on both.
Thanks for the useful information. Do your conclusions hold for black and white prints? Thanks.
Ah, for B&W you need to read the main [written] reviews and linked B&W articles
www.northlight-images.co.uk/epson-sc-p700-printer-review/
www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon-pro-300-printer-review/
www.northlight-images.co.uk/black-and-white-printing-with-the-pro-300/
www.northlight-images.co.uk/black-and-white-printing-with-the-p700/
@@KeithCooper Great! thats the road I was lookin for, thanks. Dont like ""pils lalike" answers. Thanks again.
Hello Keith.
I'm a photographer and recently looking to purchase a printer for output (pro300 or p700), my monitor is 100% srgb gamut and also has a spyder color comparator, if I purchase the pro300 how do I try to make sure that the output is consistent with the colors after posting on the monitor?
My guess:
Purchase a monitor with 100% Adobe rgb so as to cover cmyk and do the post color relatively consistent with the output color?
Or can I achieve the same result with direct output from my existing monitor.
Looking forward to your help!❤
The monitor doesn't matter that much, and nothing will cover commercial CMYK anyway ;-)
I printed just fine for years with an sRGB monitor and good printer profiles
Read both printer reviews - the videos are but supplements to the main [written] stuff...
www.northlight-images.co.uk/photography-articles-and-reviews/printing-paper-reviews-articles/
Then, if you like videos, see my proper categorised index of topics, as opposed to the half baked options YT allows you ;-)
www.northlight-images.co.uk/keith-cooper-photography-videos-index/
@@KeithCooper Thank you very much！it helps a lot . if my monitor have both 100% srgb and 100% DCI-P3 , dose mean that using DCI-P3 is better for print?
DCI P3 is a larger space - I'd use it, perhaps calibrating the monitor to its 'native' space i.e. as big as it can do...
@@KeithCooper got it ~ :) but the DCI P3 is too warm that i don’t know why (even the srgb with d6500 calibration will become warmer) ,is this normal,please?
Warmer than what? How do you define 'too warm'?
Look at a known test image and see what they look like - this is often a problem when people are used to overly bright and too blue monitors.
Calibrate the monitor to its native gamut ~120cd/m2 and then go away and make a drink. Does it still look too warm?
See some of my monitor calibration info
www.northlight-images.co.uk/category/articles-and-reviews/datacolor/
Hi Keith,
Are there photo printers that are not ink jet based that are worth looking into? If there are, what would be the advantages and disadvantages? Thanks
Dye sub photo printers - used for event photo printing and the like
Expensive to buy, expensive consumables and limited print sizes.
Other than that, nothing occurs to me at any significant quality level. Colour lasers are a non starter in this area, unless they have changed dramatically of late.
Why wouldn’t you want an inkjet? The advantages are massive, even in office use inkjet has evolved massively to the point where laser printers are ancient technology
Brilliant video
Thanks
I own/use the Canon Pro-100 and satisfied with the output except with 1 are: the prints/ink seem to begin to fade after 4 years and accelerate after 6 years especially in direct and indirect sun light. I'm struggling to decide if the Pro-300 would be worth the cost increase to replace. Pro Canon or Hahnemuhle photo paper is used.
Well, direct sun is not good for any prints ;-)
However, the pigments of the PRO-300 should definitely last longer than the inks of the PRO-100
You mentioned that the Pro-300 and Pro-10 printhead are the same. Will the Pro-300 printhead work in a Pro-10?
Ah, I don't know.
Ask here in the Canon forum, if you can't see an answer.
www.printerknowledge.com
Which of the two prints better BW images considering using the same paper?
it depends... Like most things like this there is no simple answer I could ever give.
See these:
www.northlight-images.co.uk/black-and-white-printing-with-the-pro-300/
www.northlight-images.co.uk/black-and-white-printing-with-the-p700/
Anyone saying one is best without specifying exactly what they are testing is, at best, plain wrong ;-)
Which of the two printers in question have the best archival, fade resistant ink sets?
Maybe the Epson, but you'll need to do a bit of detective work on sites like
wilhelm-research.com
it's not info I keep track of I'm afraid.
@@KeithCooper Thank you kindly for the reply.
OK, so print quality is the same. But which is easier to maintain?. Which is less likely to clog up? That is my question.
Your question requires long term testing, with a variety of usage scenarios.
As such it's something I specifically cannot address in my testing since I get new printers on loan and I am not allowed to live in a printer warehouse... ;-)
That said - I left a 300 for six months and it needed just a single nozzle check/clean
Hi Keith,
Useful video for this PRO 300 user. An issue that I seem to have is that I use Professional Print and Layout as a plugin from Lightroom. In Lightroom I have the PPI set to 300 (standard for Canon I'm led to believe). In PPL every image I work on has a default of 240 dpi as the resolution. Is there any way (or indeed, any need) to change this in PPL? I know that DPI and and PPI are different but I'm not sure why it can't be customized. Thanks in advance.
This is a tricky one since I never use Lightroom - my printing is either direct or from photoshop, where I've set the image size as part of my editing.
Also 300 is no 'standard' - just a long lasting bit of 'perceived wisdom' much over due for retirement IMHO ;-) :-)
Check my main [written] PRO-300 review - there is a link to another article looking at optimal print resolutions
www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon-pro-300-printer-review/
For the Canon software I'd suggest asking on the printing forum at DPReview.com - Lightroom users live there ;-)
Thanks very much for the reply-I'll check out these links @@KeithCooper
Difference between Canon pro 300 and the Epson p700 you say, is almost indiscernible and both being pigment ink printers.
Well what about both those printers results compared to an Epson ET8550 and Canon pro 200 both dye ink printers of course but with one little caveat, in that you print on a fine art baryta satin and a fine art pearl (Hahnemuhle) on the et8550, as these papers are more in keeping with what the pigment ink produces.
Would you be able to tell the difference on a blind test. Just asking
Kind regards Mark
If I knew the image and the paper ...maybe
I'd expect better performance on the PRO-200 because of the number of inks compared the the 5 dyes of the 8550
Not a comparison I've ever done though
If you can't tell which one is better, then may be you should have talked about there known issues, like misalignment, lines in prints, charging paper, connexion... ;)
Ah, but what known issues? ;-)
This video is based on my direct experience in testing and reviewing printers when the printers first came out [2020]. Unfortunately, videos are set in stone, so unlike any written article, I can't got back and add updates or notes.
However, a bigger problem is that I have never seen many of these 'issues', so for me, they simply are not "known issues" at all.
An ongoing problem with limited test data, and not living in a warehouse of test printers ;-)
@@KeithCooperi've read that this printer can print default ligns , don't know how oftne it happens. I'm hesitating between Canon pro 300, Epson P700 for pigment ink printer and Epson ET 8550 for dye ink...
"Default ligns"?
Which printer?
Whos best for high print quality ansr me
Depends on exactly what you mean by "high print quality"? - means something different to every person who asks me... ;-)
How about epson et 8550 vs Canon pro 300? I know they are very different beasts, but I'm struggling with the running cost of the Canon pro 300 or epson p700 vs et8550
Sorry, I don't ever do detailed inter-brand comparisons [a 20 year review writing principle], but the differences are all to do with the inks
For people who really worry about ink costs, the Epson tank printers win easily, but good results depend on paper choices and profiling.
Canon paper handling in the A3+ printers is generally better.
Did you already make a choice? Because I've bought the ET 8550 and I'm going to return it. Rollermarks, smudges, the colours are off. Did many many testprints, all kind of paper, different profiles and I'm just not impressed by the print quality on glossy paper, linework details are foggy. They don't sell 350gr. paper, they say that it can handle 1,3mm (845grams) but don't support other brands. The front tray is slow (6 sec. ) while you can't access the tray below it, while you want to switch papers. Not the end of the world but annoying for sure. The front tray is badly designed with a part that sticks out. Prints on plain paper are worse than my office printers, probably because of the ink, I don't know, but it's not worth it. Also I read that the ink only last a couple of months unframed, it will fade quickly, so I will try canon pro 300 for better paper options, icc profiles and fade resistant ink. Mind you I've had an Epson printer for 10 years that worked just fine. Right now: I stay away from Ecotanks!
my "problem" at the moment is; I would like to buy one of these printers, but don't know if it would be worth it - cost wise. Not being a professional (and not being someone who shoots stacks of images anyway) I might only print 1 photo a month and some months nothing at all. Would these printers (or equivalent) still function if not used very much? would I be forever refilling ink thats dried up? I know you've done some good videos already on this subject but I would guess as a proper professional you don't really have this problem.
The 300 will likely fare better with such sparse use, but no inkjet will like it.
That's not enough printing really...
@@KeithCooper thanks Keith. What in your opinion is an "ok" bare minimum usage, 3 or 4 prints a month with cleaning cycles interspersed?
Yes - a nozzle check page on plain paper will suffice - I like to do something like this every few weeks - or, for larger printers every week [P5000 for example]
Or am I totally Wrong, I forgot to include🙄🤐🤐
One of those ones very dependent on image and the exact paper - not tried those
@@KeithCooper there lovey papers, the satin being slightly warmer but you are correct , very image dependent but very smooth results after i got the hang of things, sure Im still only a kid with regards digital printing😇😉
Oddly red river paper shows the Canon as cheaper.
Ah, not so odd?...
Canon in the US have a history of deeply discounting printers in this category [100/10] so I would expect it to occur in the 200/300 line at some point.
@@KeithCooper sorry, referring to running cost.
I didn't realize the pro 200 is dye ink. I'm between the 200 and 300. I do mostly black-and-white so I think I'm dropping the ET 8550 as an option. But I hear with a paper profile it can get quite good.
Pulling my hair out!!
See my written reviews on the Northlight site - all have specific B&W sections.
My videos are generally supplements to the written ones - which are where the real detail goes
Links from here:
www.northlight-images.co.uk/photography-articles-and-reviews/printing-paper-reviews-articles/
Wow, this should be a SNL skit. You gave an opinion about opinions. Haha. Genius. It does however make the title of the video misleading in the end. What does that really mean? Misleading? To one person it could be misleading to another it could be insightful, who am I to judge, and at different points in one’s life, it could represent a point of view that could be the opposite of an opinion held in the future or in the past. We’ll need to understand the context.
"Better" is a term I use with care - have done in 20 years of writing reviews. Any simple answer is likely wrong :-)
Surprise, surprise - no easy solution. Not here, not in life in general. Who'd have thought that??
Indeed...
Thank you Keith for as another informative video. I have read your articles relating to both printers. I would liike to ask a few questions relating to both printers or potentially relating to other printer choices. Could I email you please?
Yes, absolutely, just don't ask which is best [it depends] ;-)
Hi Keith, no I won't ask which is best. I only want to explain my need and situation and some advice, if that is okay? I would prefer to email, I can't see your email contact anywhere.
Thank you
Northlight images - where all the articles live...
@@KeithCooper
Okay thanks
@@KeithCooper
I had a look there but I could not find the contact details Keith. It is probably just me, I can't see things that are in front of me at times!