Canon iPF 5000 is looking promising...

[Tony Bonanno]

Hi group,

Don't know how many of you are like me, but I've been using the Epson UC pigment printers for awhile, and before that their dye based stuff. The past few years I've had the whole gamut at one point or another in the the studio... 2200, 800/1800, 2400K3, and three PRO 4000's. The smaller printers are reasonably friendly as far as keeping them working and having a reliable print engine, but their ink costs are a killer. The larger printers like my 4000(s) have been a real love/hate relationship. I use QTR for B&W and profiles within CS2 for color work (for all the printers). I live at 7000 feet and low humidity and the 4000 at times has been a real monster... frequent clogs, frequent bubbles in lines, frequent unexplainable (seasonal ?) color shifts, etc, etc. There have been times, if I could have moved it myself without help, that I would have chucked a 4000 into the arroyo behind my house to keep company with the packrats and coyotes. I was ready to plunk my card down for a 4800 or 7800 UNTIL I heard about the need to swap the ink cartridges which was a deal killer for me.

So what is the point of this rant... I'm really getting enthused based on early reports (Michael Reichmann, etc.) about the new Canon pigment printer, the iPF 5000. Apparently the few units that are in the hands of early adopters are getting some great reviews, especially in the area of INK COST vs OUTPUT, clogging (or lack of), no need to swap MK and PK inks, paper handling, QUALITY of output, etc. Currently, there is just the one 17" model which clearly is intended to go head to head with the 4800, but surely there is a 24" version in the pipeline.. Initial costs appear to be somewhat higher than a 4800, but over time, perhaps more economical, perhaps a lot more if I don't have to constantly flush tons of expensive ink flushing lines and clearing clogs !

Anyway, just wondering if anyone else here on the forums is following this printer also.. I'm hoping that we are going to see some serious competition between Epson and Canon, which hopefully will benefit US...

A local dealer has invited me to do some testing and printing with him when he gets a unit in (don't know how long that will take). I'll let you know what comes of it, if it happens..

Cheers,

Tony

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I'm really getting enthused based on early reports (Michael Reichmann, etc.) about the new Canon pigment printer, the iPF 5000. Apparently the few units that are in the hands of early adopters are getting some great reviews, ...

Just in case you haven't read this review.

Bart

 

[Tony Bonanno]

Thanks Bart, hadn't seen that one...

Tony

 

[Peter Galbavy]

Has anyone got one of these yet ? Any direct opinions, especially about the ink coverage / running costs ?

My own need is that A3+ (13x19) on my broken S9000 is not quite enough sometimes, and it's either go with a PixmaPro 9500 when and if it ships and live with the size limits, or look at something like this 5000...

Edited: For the question below, I found the luminous landscape review which mentions paper handling;
(Real dumb question too, but are there any issues with printing on smaller paper via a direct feed path ?)

 

[Tony Bonanno]

Has anyone got one of these yet ? Any direct opinions, especially about the ink coverage / running costs ?

My own need is that A3+ (13x19) on my broken S9000 is not quite enough sometimes, and it's either go with a PixmaPro 9500 when and if it ships and live with the size limits, or look at something like this 5000...

Edited: For the question below, I found the luminous landscape review which mentions paper handling;
(Real dumb question too, but are there any issues with printing on smaller paper via a direct feed path ?)

Hi Peter,

My local dealer has one and our ASMP chapter had a meeting there a few days ago and played with the printer a little. No one here seems to have mastered the software yet, so we've only seen a few prints. They looked fine, but there were no 4800 prints to compare them to. I will say that the B&W prints I saw were quite good.. Seemed to have deep blacks, good dmax and metamerism free.

I think the paper handling will actually be one of the strong features. It will not handle anything smaller than 8x10 though (same as Epson 4000/4800).

While printing a show this weekend on my Epson 4000, I had some major problems and have nothing nice to say about the 4000 right now. I'm suspecting I may have a Canon 5000 soon as the 4000's problems have become rather serious. Two areas I'm concerned about with the 5000 are "profiles" for the numerous papers I use and the software being buggy and not very intuitive. The bottom line of course is the image quality and that seems to be fine from what I saw and what I'm hearing.

Tony

 

[Peter Galbavy]

Further reading yesterday means that I think I may wait a few months - and survive with what I have access to - until they announce the "ipf6500" (leaked by Canon themselves in environmental docs for the ink supply in Oz) which everyone out there appears to think will be the 24" version. Thinking about this in practical terms, the difference between a 13" carriage and a 17" one is not really enough to justify jumping on the spur of the moment - but a 24" may, depending on price ticket and running costs. Bigger is not always better, but my current ideal would be to produce 30"x20" framed prints, and I can make do with commercial printing for the short term...

 

[Tony Bonanno]

Hi Peter,

Looks like my 4000 has a bad print head so I'm dead in the water for anything larger than 13" right now (R2400). This is not good as I have some work in the 16" range that I need to deliver. Will have to get it printed elsewhere. Almost tempted to bring the Canon from our local vendor to the studio, but not sure I want to jump yet. Adding to the difficulty of what to do is the news about some serious HP models appropriate for pro photographers coming down the pike.. Wish my darn 4000 could have held out a little longer. The most expedient and sensible thing for me to do is probably get a 4800 and just use it until some of the competition has a better offering. I won't mess with another 4000 as much as I need the two blacks (mat and photo) as I've just had too many headaches with the 4000. Three of them and they've all been a pain.

 

[Tony Bonanno]

Out with the 4000, In with the 5000 !

I agree with you Peter that the 24" makes sense and I'd like to see that capability in my studio. I'm pretty dissappointed with Epson at the moment. Several messages and emails left a week ago regarding my print head and no response. I had to have prints outsourced to supply a couple of clients this past week and I'm feeling really frustrated. SOOoo, yesterday, I packed up the 4000 in the garage (not sure what I'm going to do with it) and hauled in a new Canon IPf5000, even with its "startup" issues common to a new product, I think I'll be okay and down the road, once I've mastered it, very pleased. And if it turns out to be as good as I hope it will be, then maybe the 24" model will replace it several months from now. At my elevation and low humidity (Santa Fe, NM - 7000 ft), if it doesn't suffer from the nozzle clogs, etc that I experienced with my three 4000's, then I'll be a big step ahead. My first test prints on Red River Satin paper (the only paper in studio that I could grab a profile for off the web), I was impressed with the color accuracy and especially the rendering of "GREENS". I think the ink dot size is slightly larger and more visible under magnification than the 4000, but in practical terms, a non-issue. Anyway, too soon to tell yet, but I'm optimistic about this beast and at least I can print again. Will keep you and the forum posted..

 

[Asher Kelman]

Congrats Tony! Keep us informed.

Asher

 

[Peter Galbavy]

Oh, Canon UK make it extra hard to hand over money. After a week of waiting for a call, someone from Canon UK reluctantly pushed me to some "solutions" vendors who are supposed to demo the ipf5000. One has no plans to have a demo unit and the other has a unit but it has not yet been unpacked let alone installed. I did ask to go to Canon's own "View" showroom, which is about 1/2 mile from my daytime address but I obviously am too lowly for that - even though they have a demo unit setup.

I don't need "solutions", I want products and consumables. If I go to one of these solutions integrators to test my selected paper(s) against the pigment inks I will feel obligated to listen to their sales pitch, while in reality I simply want to test, but and consume.

Well done Canon. Another way to make your end users feel even more negative about using your products.

 

[David White]

I've had this printer for a little over a month and love it! I've made about 40 8x10s and around 10 16x24's and the ink level had not gone down from the point it was at after the initial filling of the tubes. Our humidity is normally around 20-25% and I have experienced no clogs with this machine.

The profiles I generated with Eye-One Photo for several types of luster-type paper and very large and outside of Adobe RGB in several areas.

There are some paper selection issues but I would expect to see these corrected with driver and firmware upgrades at some point in the near future.

The roll paper holder is really nice and is pretty much automated so the printer is able to print on both roll and single sheets without having to manually change anything.

It's a heavy beast, coming in at around 100 lbs. Not something you will want to bring into the house by yourself, particularly if you have stairs to navigate while moving it.

The big plus, aside from the excellent colors, is the ability to switch between matte and gloss type papers without switching inks. This is the main reason I never bought the Epson and waited for something better.

 

[Tony Bonanno]

Oh, Canon UK make it extra hard to hand over money. After a week of waiting for a call, someone from Canon UK reluctantly pushed me to some "solutions" vendors who are supposed to demo the ipf5000. One has no plans to have a demo unit and the other has a unit but it has not yet been unpacked let alone installed. I did ask to go to Canon's own "View" showroom, which is about 1/2 mile from my daytime address but I obviously am too lowly for that - even though they have a demo unit setup.

I don't need "solutions", I want products and consumables. If I go to one of these solutions integrators to test my selected paper(s) against the pigment inks I will feel obligated to listen to their sales pitch, while in reality I simply want to test, but and consume.

Well done Canon. Another way to make your end users feel even more negative about using your products.

Wow, Peter, that is discouraging !! I'm not convinced yet, but I think this printer will be a winner.. seems the positives will definitely outweigh the negatives. I have to admit, I'm wondering how Canon will "support" this printer. Epson, in spite of my frustrations with their products, up until this last go round, were pretty good about support. I get good support from Canon Professional Services with my cameras and lenses, but I think the printer folks are a different division and they sure seem to be almost invisible. This is an area I'm very concerned about as my printer is, like my cameras, critical to my work and livelihood. Hope you have a chance to demo one before too long. I'd be curious what you think ?

Tony

 

[Tony Field]

Interesting comments regarding the ipf5000. I have been looking at one at my local camera emporium and have been less than impressed. A couple of expert printers have been working with this unit and demonstrate less than expected results. For example, the printed B&W images look pretty good but, when compared with an Epson 4800 identical image, display a restricted tone range that is very flat. Nothing can seem to get a desired D-max.

Colour images are not so hot relative to the 4800.

For me, this is a pain - I was wanting to replace my Canon 9000 with a pigment printer simply for image permanence and to retain print speed. Seems like I will have to use only the Epson 4800 which is slower than a 2CV trying to climb a 10% grade.

 

[Tony Bonanno]

Hi Tony,

Hmmm, wonder if they have the printer settings (which are amazingly obscure) set right ? I've been printing from the 16 bit plugin at 2400x1200 and the color gamut and accuracy seem to be pretty good. When I compare the Canon print to the same image on a K3 R2400 printer or my Epson 4000, the Canon looks fine. If anything, the blues and greens seem to have more presence. The Canon images at normal viewing distances actually look like they've got slightly more "punch". On the other hand, I see a larger dot size and more "grain" with the Canon, which I suspect is the reason some folks are questioning its "continuous tone" capability - but this difference is only visible under close examination with two pairs of reading glasses on , not real world viewing. There are so many variables when it comes to test prints. But I'm still "testing" myself, and the jury is still out. I will say that he B&W neutrality is pretty impressive, even with the standard driver. The biggest issue I see with this printer is the user interface which leaves a lot to be desired in its current version. There is a lot of power in the software, but it needs some serious de-bugging and streamlining. I also have to admit that I would have expected at least 2880 dpi resolution on a supposedly state of the art professional printer. Admittedly, it's probably a non-issue for most real world printing.

If this printer turns out to be significantly less problematic regarding air in the lines and nozzle clogs, then I'll be way ahead compared to the constant problems I've had with three Epson 4000's. And the fact that I don't have to switch black inks is icing on the cake (compared to the 4800). I just hope that Canon has its "support" act together with these printers. Time will tell.

Tony

 

[Tony Field]

Hmmm, wonder if they have the printer settings (which are amazingly obscure) set right ? I've been printing from the 16 bit plugin at 2400x1200 and the color gamut and accuracy seem to be pretty good.

Yes, this may be the problem - however, I do get nervous when real experts have yet to deliver a fine print after a few weeks of playing. As you indicate, it is probably fixable with more polished software and/or firmware but that will take time (probably many many months) for Canon to repair.

 

[Tony Bonanno]

Yes, this may be the problem - however, I do get nervous when real experts have yet to deliver a fine print after a few weeks of playing. As you indicate, it is probably fixable with more polished software and/or firmware but that will take time (probably many many months) for Canon to repair.

After reading you earlier post Tony, I printed out a B&W test image from my R2400 (the only printer I have with the K3 inkset at the moment) which I thought looked pretty good. I then tried to duplicate the look using the Canon. With the 16 bit Canon plug in which contains a rather complete B&W feature set (activated by selecting the "auto monochrome" profile instead of the normal paper profile), I was able to make a print that was almost indistinguishable from the R2400 print. Admittedly, it took me several tries with different curve settings, etc., but it was possible to do without too much hassle.

Anyway, the point is don't be discouraged by the experts not getting the output you expected. Others are getting different results. I suspect some of Canon's software features are just not being seen due to the poor documentation. One thing is for sure, all of us who have been use to Epson's software and drivers are in for a very different experience with the Canon driver/plug-in and it takes time to figure it out. Can't rush it or you will be disappointed.

Still testing...

Tony

 

[Kirk Thompson]

Tony B, about the graininess: Did you see Michael Reichmann's review postscript re: clearing this up with a head alignment? Have you checked this out?

Kirk

 

[Tony Bonanno]

Tony B, about the graininess: Did you see Michael Reichmann's review postscript re: clearing this up with a head alignment? Have you checked this out?

Kirk

Hi Kirk,

Yes, I saw Michael's review which was most helpful in several respects and the comment about the alignment. I made sure that I did both the automatic and manual alignment and I'm confident the alignment is fine. I think some of the issue is semantics. Apparently, it is more an issue of "grain" or more accurately the dot size combined with the variable dot size pattern. The difference is clearly visible if you are looking very closely when compared to the Epson models. Part of this may be due to the different technologies in the print heads. I suspect Canon could tweak it through software, firmware, etc. I don't think the issue is really a "continuous tone" issue at all, it's simply a "grain" or dot size issue. To the extent that larger dots obsure certain tonal gradation... perhaps if you are using a magnifying glass. The Canon prints, under normal viewing, do not suggest any problem with "continuous tone" or tonality... they just have a more visible "grain", very similar to what we see with real film.

One other thing I have noticed with the Canon is much less banding or horizontal ink laydown pattern comapred to the Epsons I've had. All of my Epsons displayed, under magnification, even with a perfectly aligned printer, a clear horzontal laydown pattern. The Canon print head seems an improvement in this respect. Actually, when closely inspecting the "grain" (dot size and pattern) between the Epson and Canon, the horizontal banding artifacts in the Epson were more annoying to me than the dot size of the Canon.

Would I prefer the Canon's dot size to be smaller ? YES. I readily admit that there is certain amount of "pixel peeping complex" in my makeup and I would just feel better about a smaller dot size.. .

Oh well, back to work..

Tony B

 

[Louis Bouillon]

Tony
I read a comment from you on the galbraith site regarding the hassles "single sheet feed slot in the back" of the IP 5000.
I can't find any instructions on feeding single sheet from the back.Their limited instructions show a feed from the front slot only. I can feed that way but the printer MUST be set to "POP board" for the front slot to open. Do you know a way to feed directly from the back without selecting POP board?
In addition with POP board selected on the printer ,one must select POP board in the printer plug in media selection otherwise.the printer shows an errror and must eject the paper. Did you encounter the same problems?
I would really like to single feed with this printer without getting locked in the POP board media driver.Thanks

Louis Bouillon

 

[Tony Bonanno]

Tony
I read a comment from you on the galbraith site regarding the hassles "single sheet feed slot in the back" of the IP 5000.
I can't find any instructions on feeding single sheet from the back.Their limited instructions show a feed from the front slot only. I can feed that way but the printer MUST be set to "POP board" for the front slot to open. Do you know a way to feed directly from the back without selecting POP board?
In addition with POP board selected on the printer ,one must select POP board in the printer plug in media selection otherwise.the printer shows an errror and must eject the paper. Did you encounter the same problems?
I would really like to single feed with this printer without getting locked in the POP board media driver.Thanks

Louis Bouillon

Hi Louis,

I'm not sure the IPF5000 and the IP5000 are similar as far as paper feed. I'm using the 17" wide format IPF5000 (leave it to Canon to screw up the naming .. consistent with the EOS1 camera bodies too..). Anyway, there are no "POP" references with the IPF model. Are you using the IPF or IP 5000 ?

The IPF has several paper feed options.. front thick media, front loading cassette/tray, rear straight feed, top rear slot/tray.. I use the top rear slot/tray mostly for large paper and art paper. Works pretty well all in all. I disabled the "straight paper check" which Canon calls "paper askew check" as it is not really necessary with the way the tray is designed and feeding paper couldn't be easier.

Hope this helps..

Tony

 

[Louis Bouillon]

Thanks for the reply Tony.My mistake. I am using the IPF 5000 17 in.Could you describe how to feed from the rear slot? I can.t find any instructions on how to do this.Also when I feed from the top tray I keep getting the "paper askew" warning and need to feed multiple times even though the paper seems to be perfectly straight.How do you disable paper askew?
Louis Bouillon

 

[Tony Bonanno]

Thanks for the reply Tony.My mistake. I am using the IPF 5000 17 in.Could you describe how to feed from the rear slot? I can.t find any instructions on how to do this.Also when I feed from the top tray I keep getting the "paper askew" warning and need to feed multiple times even though the paper seems to be perfectly straight.How do you disable paper askew?
Louis Bouillon

Hi Louis,

Go into MENU, select MED DETAIL SET, then click down arrrow for paper types.. you can cycle through all the paper types using the right arrow. With the paper type selected, hit the down arrow and you will be in the settings menu for each paper type.. cycle through the settings with right arrow until you come to SKEW CHECK LV, then hit the down arrow and select OFF. That will disable the paper skew routine and you can load paper on the top rear tray without hassle. The design of the tray is such that the guide bar really makes the check unnecessary. With one caution: When the skew check is activated, it will prevent the printhead from "printing" IF the paper for some reason doesn't feed which is a good thing. When you disable the skew check, visually make sure the paper feeds when you start to print, otherwise you'll be mopping up the ink off the platen (I found out the hard way).

Cheers,

Tony

 

[Louis Bouillon]

Thanks for the tip Tony. No problem with manual feeding at all now.
Louis Bouillon

 

[Nicolai Grossman]

Hi!

I'm looking to by my first inkjet and am [impatiently] waiting to see how the iPF 5000 shakes out as compared to the Epson 4800. As I have no experience with either, I have nothing to contribute, but I appreciate being able to lurk.

Does anyone know if more has been learned about the color issues discussed here on LL?

 

[Asher Kelman]

Canon UK RE: iPF5000

Dear Peter,

We apologise that you have difficulty in getting a demonstration on the iPF5000. We are able to sort a demonstration for you at The View, HOWEVER it does need to go through a reseller.

As you can imagine, I, personally, get hundreds of enquiries from end-users regarding these machines and we (Canon) cannot afford to have all these people turn up at The View expecting demonstrations.

The View is a CORPORATE facility designed as a demo show room (IE - NOT sales!!) for business to business demonstrations. If you wish to have a demonstration there, then please contact one of the resellers you've already spoken to and they can arrange a demo for you. Alternatively, if you search for "canon plotters" on Google, then the first 10 resellers that come up will be probably the best 10 people to speak to.

Many resellers across the country do have demonstration facilities and provide full support on the products. These are the people that can give you a quotation on the hardware, accessories and consumables (as you've said you've wanted). Due to the specialist nature of the kit we do not sell these directly.

Many Thanks

Canon (UK) Ltd - Large Format Printers

Reposted pending Canon registration

 

[Peter Galbavy]

Interesting response and also interesting to see Canon being interested in negative publicity.

I was contacted, I think I mentioned this earlier, by a "Scott" in Canon UK Wide Format dept. who pointed me two local (London) resellers who are supposed to have demonstation equipment of their own. After some toing and froing, both have gone dead on me, neither arranged demos and neither seems interesting in selling one unit.

As the buyer there is only so far I will go to chase the seller to give them my money. Scott never bothered with a followup ("Hi! Did you get the right quotes and demos from those resellers I pointed you at ?") and the resellers don't appear to want my business.

This is why the internet and commoditisation of boxed products works - you browse, you select, you buy. It removes the need for commision-hungry sales people who don't care about small sales. Then the manufacturer wonders why their market share is falling. Stange, huh ?

I should also note than in the UK at least, "demo equipment" is sold at an even higher discount than normal to resellers via a special marcoms budget (60-75% sometimes) in order to fulfill exactly what isn't happening for me above. Normal practise, especially with small resellers (having worked for one in the 90s) is to then sell on this kit at normal prices and take the profit. With many manufacturers, this is understood and ignored. No idea if this is what's happening here, but again "huh!"

 

[Louis Bouillon]

IPF 5000 profiles

I want to print large targets to profile 6 papers,3 PK's and 3 MK's using the print plugin 16bits highpass. I am planning to use "photo paper plus " for PK's and "premium matte for MK 's in the media selection window. Is this the right selection for targets?
I am also planning to use in the output window "none(no color correction)" Is this right for a target?
Any comment from anyone who has used those parameters for target profiling on this printer are welcome.Thanks
Louis Bouillon

 

[Louis Bouillon]

Anyone?
Louis Bouillon

 

[Don Lashier]

Well, I can't answer as to which media setting is best for printing on a particular paper, but generally you want to use the same settings for printing a target as you intend to use for actual prints using the profiles you're making. "No color correction" is generally what you want for profiled output.

If you're not sure about which media setting to use, go to drycreekphoto.com and grab Ethan's printer evaluation target and try various settings.

- DL