Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Epson 2200 or Canon s9000


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 Reefkeep

Reefkeep

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 340 posts
  • Location:Jax Florida

Posted 20 February 2003 - 07:44 PM

Anyone have any feed back on either the Epson 2200 or Canon s9000? Thinking about spending some money =)

#2 james

james

    The Engineer

  • Super Mod
  • 9969 posts
  • Location:Houston TX

Posted 20 February 2003 - 08:14 PM

I have the Canon S900 and I love it. It prints faster than the Epson and the quality is as good or better.

Cheers
James
Canon 1DsMkIII - Seacam Housing
Dual Ikelite Strobes
Photo site - www.reefpix.org

#3 davephdv

davephdv

    Doc Eyeballs

  • Senior Moderator
  • 2285 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Goleta CA

Posted 20 February 2003 - 08:37 PM

I've never tried a Cannon. I have the 2200 and it blows away any printer I've ever seen or used. Very very quite. The pigment inks are suppose to have a very long view life.
Dave Burroughs, Nikon D300, D2X, Subal housing, DS160 strobes

Life is a beach and then you dive.

My Website


#4 markh

markh

    Tiger Shark

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 513 posts
  • Location:Leics, UK

Posted 21 February 2003 - 09:50 AM

I've heard that both are excellent with regards photo quality. It is something I am also toying with as a next purchase.

What are poeples opinions on compatible vs original ink on printers. I have used compatible on the Epson 870 for quite a while now with good results and saved megabucks on the original price. Although I do tend to use the printer a lot. If I was to invest in the 2200 I would probably limit its use to high end photos via the original inks and hence not use it for more day to day jobs.

Thoughts?

Mark
Dirk Pitt taught me everything!!!!
E10/Titan housing/1 x Sea & Sea 90 Duo

#5 Cybergoldfish

Cybergoldfish

    Sperm Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1954 posts
  • Location:UK */Seychelles/Singapore
  • Interests:Don't include plankton

Posted 22 February 2003 - 07:21 AM

The new Epson Printers are unbeatable and utilise 'light-fast inks'.

The memories are also upgradeable so it dumps all the info in the printer and frees up the PC instantly.

Always print onto 'Premiere' film too - It's the 'Dog's'

#6 TJO

TJO

    Moray Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 83 posts
  • Location:Yokohama, Japan

Posted 24 February 2003 - 04:43 AM

I own the Canon 9000 and use an Epson 3500 at work (same Mac computer).
I think the Canon is better. Better quality and faster. But I don't know about
the 2200. Probably they are very similar. However, I miss the function to be
able to print directly on CD-ROMs with the Canon.

#7 Simon K.

Simon K.

    Tiger Shark

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 637 posts
  • Location:Frankfurt, Germany

Posted 01 April 2003 - 04:44 AM

At The moment you can get in Germany only the Epson 2100. How big is the difference betwenn the 2200 and the 2100.

If anyone knows: how big is the Quallity diffrence between th 2200/2100 and the "top consumer" modell Epson 925

Thanks Simon

#8 Chris_Duncan

Chris_Duncan

    Triggerfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 41 posts
  • Location:San Diego

Posted 01 April 2003 - 07:46 AM

What are poeples opinions on compatible vs original ink on printers. I have used compatible on the Epson 870 for quite a while now with good results and saved megabucks on the original price. Although I do tend to use the printer a lot. If I was to invest in the 2200 I would probably limit its use to high end photos via the original inks and hence not use it for more day to day jobs.

Below is a much longer opinion on OEM (original equipment manufacturers) ink vs. compatible ink than many of you would probably care to read.

I personally do not think there is much difference in quality between compatible ink cartridges and the OEMs. The compatible ink cartridges (Canon and Epson) are just plastic containers that hold the ink, so the only thing that can impact the quality of the printing is the ink itself. I find the ink with compatibles to be equal to the OEM cartridge in most cases. The lower price that you find with compatible ink cartridges is not because of the use of cheaper materials (many times the compatible manufactures source the dye used in creating the ink from the same manufacturer as the OEM), but because they are making less profit on each cartridge. While the OEMs make $.70 on the $1, the compatible manufacturers make $.30 on the $1.

On a side note, it is rather amusing and frustrating to see the lengths printer manufacturers will go to protect their highly lucrative ink cartridge business. For HP and Lexmark they have designed a cartridge that has the print head built-in. For this reason it is really difficult for a third-party to make a knock-off of an HP and Lexmark product without infringing on some patents. This created a market for companies to remanufacture or recycle (collect them from schools, businesses, landfills, etc. inspect them, clean them up, and resell them) the used HP and Lexmark cartridges. When this started becoming more prevalent, HP and Lexmark began integrating a chip on the cartridge that would "turn-off" the cartridge when it ran out of ink, making it impossible to reuse the cartridge. Since then some remanufacturers have found ways to turn the cartridge back "on."

For Canon and Epson printers the print head is in the printer and not the cartridges. For this reason, it is possible for compatible manufacturers to "re-design" a cartridge to try to avoid infringing on any patents. It is a tight rope to walk since OEMs have patents on the dimensions, the size of the sponges in the cartridge, the materials, etc. That is why you will see many compatible manufacturers based in China where the labor is cheap and more importantly the patent laws are lax.

Anyway, you will find that the original cost of the printer in most cases, will pale in comparison to the cost of the ink for the life of the printer. That is why when I decide to buy a printer the cost of the ink and supplies runs a close second to print quality. It is also another reason I will never buy an HP or Lexmark printer (besides the fact that I think the quality from Canon printers is superior).

Chris

#9 astrl

astrl

    Triggerfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 30 posts
  • Location:Florida

Posted 01 April 2003 - 03:15 PM

I don't know about anyone else, but I have owned two Canon printers (a BJC series and I now own a S600) and both of them have had print problem within the first year. The first one started printing black lines across the page and this one is now not printing yellows on the Nozzle check and there are horizontal stripes through the pictures like the head is not aligned. I have replaced the cartridges and even the container they sit in, cleaned the print head, aligned the head,... everything! Nothing seems to work! So now I am looking at buying an HP since most of the photographers of my aquaintance say they use HP with no problems.

Has anyone else had this much trouble with Canon or another brand?

astrl :huh: