Canon i950: Oh How I Adore Thee

[Jason Dunn]

Since <a href="http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com">Digital Media Thoughts</a> still isn't live, you'll have to excuse this little off-topic journey.<br /><br />About two weeks ago, I <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/redirect?tag=jasondunn-20&path=tg/detail/-/B00008CMUB/qid%3D1046929053/sr%3D8-1">purchased</a> a new printer: the Canon i950.<!> I've been an Epson fan for a long time, and have been using a C80 for the past two years. I always swore by the vibrancy of Epson inks, but recently I had a chance to take a closer look at Canon printers, and was very, very impressed. Even their cheap $89 CND i320 produces surprisingly crisp borderless 4 x 6 images. I was looking at the i850, and had the geek desire to posses it, but as tempting as the 2/4 picolitre technology was, I wanted a "real" photo printer with a six ink system (the i850 was a general purpose printer with a four ink system). In a rare fit of self control, I opted to wait - and was rewarded with the release of the i950 a month later.<br /><br />Oh what a printer!<br /><br /><img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/web/691822_125.jpg" /><!><br /><br />The printer's 3072 nozzles spit out ink in 2-picolitre sizes at a resolution of 4800 x 1200 dpi, which means finer overall quality. It's capable of border-free 4x6, 5x7, and 8.5x11 prints, which makes it ideal for printing digital photos. I've had images printed by Ofoto, Shutterfly, Kodak, and dotPhoto, but the quality of the i950 prints surpasses them all. The clarity of the images is stunning - I haven't done any huge comparative reviews by printing the same image on every printer, but I can't imagine getting anything better than the quality I'm seeing.<br /><br />The printer is also amazingly fast - it prints a little slower than the specs would indicate (isn't that always the way), but it will spit out 4x6 images in about 40 seconds, which is fantastic when you need a photo just as someone is heading out the door. 8.5x11 prints take longer, about 3 minutes, but compared to the C80 I owned, this thing is a rocket. Style-wise, it looks slick on my desk - very clean lines, with a wonderful black high-gloss finish in the centre.<br /><br />General text and line art graphics and crisp and far surpass my Epson C80. It's fast, very quiet, and quite good on ink so far. About the only think I don't like about this printer is the fact that Canon doesn't make 8x10 photo paper. Does anyone at Canon know how hard it is to find frames for 8.5x11 photos? It's breaks in logic like this that make me wonder if the people who market these products actually use them, but other than that, this printer has blown me away in every way - it's the best printer I've ever owned, bar none.<br /><br />If you're looking for a photo printer, I can't give any other printer a higher recommendation. I'm sure some of the high-end Epson printers would be as good or better, but without getting into expensive large-format printers, this is as good as it gets. The printer can be <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/redirect?tag=jasondunn-20&path=tg/detail/-/B00008CMUB/qid%3D1046929053/sr%3D8-1">purchased from Amazon.com.</a> You can also <a href="http://pocketpcthoughts.pricegrabber.com/search_getprod.php/masterid=691822/search=Canon%2520i950/ut=4493db9777b0fbfe">search for the lowest price using Pricegrabber</a> or <a href="http://www.canon.ca/products/productElement.asp?lng=en&gid=2&sgid=20&prodid=420&ovr=1">check out the full specs</a>.

[ExtremeSIMS]

I, too, was a long time Epson user. However, I recently bought a Canon S900, and man, it's sweet. Fast, good color, great Mac OS X drivers.

[Daimaou]

I got the 850i Version and well this canon Printers Rock ! just try to print a full A4 picture form a 3 to 5 Mo Numeric camera and you will be amazed !

I am fully agree that the 950i sis better but Honestly I didn't saw such big difference while testing both of them with the same picture in my retailer shop

[revolution.cx]

It's just too bad that the wide carriage version they just announced doesn't have the same guts as the i950. It's better than the S9000 but it's a shame they didn't get the good stuff in there.

I'm waiting until I can get a 24" wide paper path...but that's $3000 so I'll be waiting (and saving) a while...

[PDAC-Bob]

Agreed! The Canon 900/9000 series are ace printers, especially for anyone into digital photography, product shooting or even photoshop/graphic work.

In the UK, Canon hardware and consumables are often charged at rip-off prices, so shopping around is essential.

If you are on a bit more of a budget, check out the Epson 925 which I believe is being discounted in a lot of places now. Very different quality from the old Epson Stylus Photo series, takes roll photo paper and is much quieter too.

Bob

[Peter Foot]

It's just too bad that the wide carriage version they just announced doesn't have the same guts as the i950. It's better than the S9000 but it's a shame they didn't get the good stuff in there.

I'm waiting until I can get a 24" wide paper path...but that's $3000 so I'll be waiting (and saving) a while...

True, the S9000 didn't have the same guts as the S900, the A3 printers always seem to be a generation behind. :?

I'm still happy with my S820 though, even though its obsolete :cry:

[Paragon]

I had one as well for a few days. I agree with everything that Jason, and the rest of you are saying about it. BUT, I found that as soon as a I threw any volume at it, it would jam, and just plain not work well. I use my printer to run of colour brochures a couple hundred at a time every few weeks. I ended up going back to old faithful Epson and bought a C82.

Dave

[st63z]

I think the mags have also been extolling the Canons for quite awhile (matches Epson quality, much much faster, separate ink tanks, etc).

But I'm darn tired of finicky inkjets and cartridge hassles. What's the recommendation for a color laser with the longest-lasting toners (least frequent consumables)? Some everyday workhorse that prints decent photos (not as good as the best 6-color microdroplet inkjets necessarily, but good enough). For example our dept. has been using a Lexmark C750N which prints more than decent photos.

And actually I want a full copier combo (to replace old Brother MFC-9600 monochrome laser MFC and also replace the photo inkjets for most things at home). Basically a color laser equivalent of the HP OfficeJet d155 ($799), preferrably with large format (tabloid/B-size) support. I've yet to have found one even *remotely* affordable.

Something w/ at least a legal-size scanbed, ADF, duplex printing & scanning/copying, 2nd input tray, network print server, decent speeds and resolutions (i.e. single-pass color printing)...

Right now I'm shooting for the Minolta-QMS magicolor 3100 with the SC-215 scanner/copier attachment, but it's not perfect.

[heyday]

I got the I-850 a few months ago and even though it is only 4 color the prints are excellent. Better yet, I can use third party ink tanks that cost me $2 each and they work great......


heyday

www.phonecow.com
"Funny name, Great long distance rates"

[DaleReeck]

I've never been an inkjet fan and had used an ALPS MD-5000P dye-sublimation printer. It produced excellent photos but I was concerned about service since Alps isn't into printers anymore and the availability of their tape-based dry ink cartridges couldn't be guaranteed in the future.

Already an HP 2200D Laser Printer user (I like their built in duplexor and IR port for convenient PocketPC use), I decided to get an HP Photosmart 7550 with duplexer unit. I can't believe the quality of inkjet photos now. A seven ink printer, it produces photos equal to or better than my dye-sub!

As for color lasers, they are getting cheaper now, but consumables are still hugely expensive. Case in point, CompUSA has a QMS color laser with 10/100 net port for $799. Awesome price and the quality of the prints are great but to refill one set of their cartridges (black, yellow, cyan, magenta) costs $525. If you use it a lot, be prepared to spend a lot over time. Plus, while color lasers are great for business docs, they really aren't meant to be photo printers as most only have 600x600 or 1200x1200 resolutions (the QMS was 600x600).

[Ethan]

If I get the 995c Bluetooth printer, will it have the same excellent quality as this one?

[BrianC]

True, the S9000 didn't have the same guts as the S900, the A3 printers always seem to be a generation behind. :?

I'm still happy with my S820 though, even though its obsolete :cry:

And exactly where did you get that information??

The s820, s900, and s9000 all have the same engines behind them, but the s900 and s9000 have more print heads making them faster. In effect, the s900 and s9000 are nearly identical, except the s9000 is a wide carriage design.

[BrianC]

About the only think I don't like about this printer is the fact that Canon doesn't make 8x10 photo paper. Does anyone at Canon know how hard it is to find frames for 8.5x11 photos?

I also hate that about Canon, they won't support common sizes because they don't make paper in that size. There is a work around though, but it will require a little bit of printing knowledge and works in this manner:

Buy 8x10 paper from Epson or another manufacturer, but avoid Kodak and HP paper since these brands don't work well with either Epson or Canon printers. Place your 8x10 on an 8.5x11 canvas in the top left corner with white space on the right and bottom and print with the 8.5x11 borderless feature and you'll end up with an 8x10 borderless.

There are multiple variances of the above as well. If you buy a lot of photo paper, you can take the stack to Kinkos to have them cut it down to size for a few dollars before you print on it.

[Jason Dunn]

I found that as soon as a I threw any volume at it, it would jam, and just plain not work well. I use my printer to run of colour brochures a couple hundred at a time every few weeks. I ended up going back to old faithful Epson and bought a C82.

Interesting - that's not something I've run into yet because to date the most I've done at one time is ten 4x6 images. :-) Most consumer-level inkjets aren't meant for volume though - I'm surprised the C82 is able to keep up. Epson does make good stuff though, so perhaps I shouldn't be too surprised. :lol:

[Jason Dunn]

I got the I-850 a few months ago and even though it is only 4 color the prints are excellent. Better yet, I can use third party ink tanks that cost me $2 each and they work great......

I tried 3rd party ink jet cartridges for my Epson C80 - bought 'em off ebay. I was amazed - they came in nice packaging, sealed just like the normal Epson cartridges. In fact, the guy on ebay claimed these were made by the same factory who made Epson inks. Perfect I thought! I put them in, made a colour printer, and although there was a little too much magenta hue, overall I was pretty impressed.

Then, three days later when the cartridges were completely bone dry and no amount of cleaning cycles would make them work, I was no longer impressed. I haven't touched a 3rd party ink cartridge since.... 8O

[Jason Dunn]

I've never been an inkjet fan and had used an ALPS MD-5000P dye-sublimation printer. It produced excellent photos but I was concerned about service since Alps isn't into printers anymore and the availability of their tape-based dry ink cartridges couldn't be guaranteed in the future.

I was an Alps MD-5000P owner too! Very nice printer, but once Alps announced they were no longer going to support it, I sold it on ebay. Great quality, but I was very dismayed with their service/support approach - it took them about six months to get a Windows XP driver out if memory serves. I really, really hate companies that do that to their users. :evil:

[Jason Dunn]

Buy 8x10 paper from Epson or another manufacturer, but avoid Kodak and HP paper since these brands don't work well with either Epson or Canon printers. Place your 8x10 on an 8.5x11 canvas in the top left corner with white space on the right and bottom and print with the 8.5x11 borderless feature and you'll end up with an 8x10 borderless.

Thanks for the tip Brian! I just find it amazing that Canon would do this - they're such a smart company, very in tune with consumer needs, and this seems so obvious...they also don't seem to have 5x7 paper either (unless I'm missing something).

EDIT: I just noticed that in the paper size selector, I can punch in a custom paper size, so that *should* allow me to print to Epson 8x10 photo paper without much fussing.

[BrianC]

I have an S9000, so I'm not sure how much the driver has changed, but you can select a custom paper size, just not with borderless printing.

5x7 paper is something new that Canon will introduce with their "i" series printers.

[Jason Dunn]

I have an S9000, so I'm not sure how much the driver has changed, but you can select a custom paper size, just not with borderless printing.

I just tested this, and the driver allowed me to select borderless printing with a custom paper size - it only gave me a warning about not doing borderless printing with plain paper.

5x7 paper is something new that Canon will introduce with their "i" series printers.

Really? That's great! 5x7 is a nice size - I use it a lot.

[Kathy_Harris]

Is the 950 ink cart refillable? Are they separate or all in one cartridge like most of the HPs? I have an HP 932 and the ink is simply too expensive. The black is refillable until the cows come home but the color ones are very, very tricky and of about 20 attempts (including many professionally refilled), we've never had a successful go.

[Jason Dunn]

Is the 950 ink cart refillable? Are they separate or all in one cartridge like most of the HPs? I have an HP 932 and the ink is simply too expensive. The black is refillable until the cows come home but the color ones are very, very tricky and of about 20 attempts (including many professionally refilled), we've never had a successful go.

The i950 has six separate cartridges - one black, and five different colours. They look pretty simple, so I imagine you could refill them if you wanted, but I've personally had too many bad experience with that sort of thing (especially colour), so I just buy the name-brand ink. I only buy units that have separate cartridges though - it's silly to throw away an ink cartridge when only one of the three colours has been used up...

[snayar]

Yeah, let's not forget about the costs for ink carts or refills.

If it's the same as with deskjets then forget it, I remember getting a cool Free HP Deskjet printer with my brand new computer but when the time came to buy ink carts I was stunned! $35 USD for a MINIATURE cartridge?!? C'mon!!!! and let's not forget about the paper costs either!

I'd rather go to Wal-Mart and print my photos real cheap (just cents per photo) and amazing quality in their new cool digital photo lab while I do the shopping!

IMHO, I think that a half-a-million-dollar machine will always be better than a $200+ photo printer.

[Jason Dunn]

I'd rather go to Wal-Mart and print my photos real cheap (just cents per photo) and amazing quality in their new cool digital photo lab while I do the shopping! IMHO, I think that a half-a-million-dollar machine will always be better than a $200+ photo printer.

A valid point. I used many online photo printing services over the past two years, and while I liked them, I increasingly found myself wanting to get the prints right away, or having the freedom to create a nice 8x10 print when inspiration struck me. Perfect example: my wife had some of her friends over last weekend, and I took a picture of them together, then went back to my computer and printed off ten copies of that image. Each person had a copy of the photo as they left that day, and the look of delight upon their faces was worth a slightly higher cost per page. :D Saved me the cost and hassle of trying to get the prints done up later at a store, then mailing them out, etc.

Depends what kind of person you are - but getting prints done locally is a very valid solution, one which I hope will drive the costs of ink down as Canon and other OEMs realize they have to get the cost per print lower...

That said, one of the things we'll see places like Ofoto and dotPhoto specialize in are the things that we CAN'T do at home very well - calendars, photo cards, etc.

[st63z]

As for color lasers, they are getting cheaper now, but consumables are still hugely expensive. Case in point, CompUSA has a QMS color laser with 10/100 net port for $799. Awesome price and the quality of the prints are great but to refill one set of their cartridges (black, yellow, cyan, magenta) costs $525. If you use it a lot, be prepared to spend a lot over time. Plus, while color lasers are great for business docs, they really aren't meant to be photo printers as most only have 600x600 or 1200x1200 resolutions (the QMS was 600x600).

Yeah the new $799 magicolor 2300 DL that's been making waves (beating out the new low-cost HP color laser handily). 4-pass printing, jiggered 2400x600 res, is almost what you'd call a host-based printer (no onboard PCL/PS). Great value for the money though. But I agree many of the color laser consumable prices are way out there in terms of $/page (not just toners.. I'm trying to make a comparison list).

I used to be all for snazzy photo inkjets, but whenever I have a new batch of digicam pics and people are wanting multiple prints of each image, then I have to disappoint them *and* still deal with the hassles of the ones I do print... Enough I say. Plus I need to buy a color, duplex MFC since everyone here's sick of black/white copies from our old Brother MFC-9600, and of having to manually flip sheets to make 2-sided copies... (Though incidentally Brother has the cheapest black toners around.)

I just figure on getting something that will take care of both needs with convenience...

But still, I may just go cheap and buy that HP Officejet d155 $800 inkjet MFC after all. Anyone has this unit and can comment? HP inkjet does give good general-purpose quality and workhorse reliability in my opinion...

I think that magicolor 3100 with the SC-215 scanner/copier attachment can be had for around $2500, but it has drawbacks: unwieldy 2-headed solution, no duplex scanning/copying (just printing), etc...

[Jason Dunn]

I used to be all for snazzy photo inkjets, but whenever I have a new batch of digicam pics and people are wanting multiple prints of each image, then I have to disappoint them *and* still deal with the hassles of the ones I do print...

I don't understand - why can't you accomplish this with an inkjet printer?

[st63z]

I used to be all for snazzy photo inkjets, but whenever I have a new batch of digicam pics and people are wanting multiple prints of each image, then I have to disappoint them *and* still deal with the hassles of the ones I do print...

I don't understand - why can't you accomplish this with an inkjet printer?

It's been more of a targeted exercise for me. My old photo Epsons streak and wick badly on plain paper, so I have to use $$$ glossy stock to impress (they ooh and aah the samples I show them, so I can't go back to plain).

Imagine coming home w/ 60 shoots from your digicam. Then everyone want their own full set of prints to take home (they're used to photomats). So you embarrassingly clean-rinse and tend to the slow-pokey printer, loading up every 5 sheets (to prevent jams) and replacing tanks every xxx pages. They're happy, "Wow home printing is great!" You force a fixed smile and think of how much those glossies and inks had cost you...

Hehe, just joking... well, not really...

[Jason Dunn]

Imagine coming home w/ 60 shoots from your digicam. Then everyone want their own full set of prints to take home (they're used to photomats). So you embarrassingly clean-rinse and tend to the slow-pokey printer, loading up every 5 sheets (to prevent jams) and replacing tanks every xxx pages. They're happy, "Wow home printing is great!" You force a fixed smile and think of how much those glossies and inks had cost you...

Hmm - interesting. I approach things differently - unless you're the world's BEST photographer, you're not going to have 60 excellent shots. I prefer to keep my photos archived and only print out the very best ones. I think you need to set realistic impressions for your friends....or just email them the images and say "There, you can print them yourself!" :wink:

[st63z]

^ Too true, for my personal use it's more a targeted exercise. But other people, feh, what can ya do? :) They're impatient, no time to even run the batch thru Photoshop/Paintshop optimizers.

I have to say I'm curious how Epson PIM II and Exif 2.2 work. I just have PIM I on my Epsons and have been too lazy to try... Whoops OT.

[CTSLICK]

Funny you posted this today, I just waltzed into the local CompUSA and bought one at lunch. Just installed it now and printed my first photos...all I can say is wow. They look pretty darn good without even messing with anything, tweaking colors etc. Very cool! 8)

[Jonathon Watkins]

I've been looking around for a decent A3 printer and have semi-decidedn on the Epspon Stylus Photo 1290 printer. I like the fact that you can have 3 differnt densities of black ink as standard and can print wonderfull B&W A3 pictures. I don't need one quite yet, so it will be interesting to see if anything new comes out before then.

I bought my Dad an Epson 950 recently. Wow. Very nice images, just a tad slow to print.

[FrankieShakes]

Just wondering if the printer has slots for media cards (SD, MMC, SM, etc..) like the HP PhotoSmart printers have?

Also... The picture shows that the printer has a top-loading tray... Does the tray stay extended like that at all times, or can it be reduced?

I'm coming from an HP printer, and am used to have the paper load from the bottom. Any information would be appreciated.

I have seen the new HP printers (ie: 7550), which supposedly support a 7-ink cartridge system... Does anyone know of these are individual tanks for each colour like the Canon?

[Jason Dunn]

Just wondering if the printer has slots for media cards (SD, MMC, SM, etc..) like the HP PhotoSmart printers have?

No, this model doesn't have that - Canon has models that supports direct card access, but I didn't need that feature.

Also... The picture shows that the printer has a top-loading tray... Does the tray stay extended like that at all times, or can it be reduced?

If you have paper in there, it stays up. If you want to remove the paper, it folds down nicely.

[Peter Foot]

True, the S9000 didn't have the same guts as the S900, the A3 printers always seem to be a generation behind. :?

I'm still happy with my S820 though, even though its obsolete :cry:

And exactly where did you get that information??

The s820, s900, and s9000 all have the same engines behind them, but the s900 and s9000 have more print heads making them faster. In effect, the s900 and s9000 are nearly identical, except the s9000 is a wide carriage design.

The 9000 has the print head of the 820, not the slighly improved version in the S900 which has more nozzles. In terms of guts yes much of the rest of the internals are the same, this is why I chose the S820 over the S900 because it was over £100 and the quality is exactly the same although the speed is not quite up to the S900.

(Update)

In fact depending on what review you read the S9000 may well have the larger head, Toms Hardware Guide seems to indicate so...

I've had only third-hand experience of this printer so I guess I've been told wrong (but it was actually by a Canon representative so just shows you never can tell...). Lucky I wasn't actually looking for an A3 printer or I may have chosen something else and I'm very pleased with the quality of my Canon.