Canon or Epson for photocopying? Need some help picking one.

[Sherbet Helix]

Can't decide which brand to choose? From what I've read. Canon is superior as far as photocopying, but I'm not sure how true this is. I was looking at these two. From what I can tell. The Epson seems better, as it has everything the Canon does, with a better black dpi resolution the Canon is only 600x600. Suggestions?

http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/jsp/Product.do?BV_UseBVCookie=yes&sku=C11CB20201

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consu...photo_all_in_one_inkjet_printers/pixma_mg8220

 

[Simon R.]

There are some overall ratings on both sites:

Epson Artisan 837 - 4.4 out of 5
Canon PIXMA MG8220 - 3.3 out of 5

I'd personally go for the Epson, not only because of these ratings but because of my past experience with both of the brands.

 

[fish]

I have an Epson 810 that I use for DVD printing (it also prints great photos). I think that the 837 uses the same inks (6 dye based cartridges) but no pigment black, so be aware that the ink will run with moisture. I use a Canon MX850 for printing and photos (pigment black + dye black, magenta, cyan, and yellow). Both are refilled with IS inks from Precision Colors so ink costs are not a factor.

 

[Tin Ho]

Have you seen an Epson printing photos? It is extremely slow. You can expect at least 5 - 8 minutes per 8x10 photo. If you have a few photos to copy you will be frustrated. Canon printers are much faster.

 

[tdudash]

I have owned both Canon & Epson, I prefer the Epson printers overall.

 

[OutOFtheinkwell]

Epson slow? That has not been my experience since I set up my Artisan 725.
I Print full color photographs 8x11 1/2 in under a minute all the time. And the photographs are all excellent. I do find that I need to tweek some pictures more than others which is normal given the fact that the printer can only work with what we give it. In other words the picture we get with the camera is key, exposure, lighting at the time. what is ON the digital result. If we have a bad picture due to camera focus or not enough light etc, we can't expect the printer to correct all that can we! I use my tools built into my Imac to change contrast, shadowing, sharpness, sometimes tint etc. and at times I just need to leave the photograph alone and go ahead and print! I set the printer for Fine glossy and use Costco papers and I get edge to edge full color prints in under a minute every time!

 

[Tin Ho]

I am talking about printing at max quality, which is desired fo printing photos. I have had 4 different Epson models. Each one prints far slower than my Canons. I have got a new R2880. It prints a 8x10 photo in max quality mode in about 7 and a half minutes. My Canon ip4700 takes less than 3 minutes for a same photo. When you comparing the speed of text document printing that's when Canon prints so much faster than Epson. This is not hard to understand if you compare the nozzle counts of Epson and Canon printers. Canon printers typically has 512 or 1024 nozzles for the text and 256/512 for each color. Epson typically has 60 per colors across all channels. Canon printers usually have 2-4k total nozzles. Epson usually have only a few hundreds total.

I printed about 10 sheets of documents double sided last night with my R2880. Man, it took almost forever. By looking at how slowly the print head carriage moved back and forth you can tell it is much slower than Canon. It would have been a breeze had I done it with my Canon ip4700, 430, etc. It's not just the R2880 is slow all my Epsons are just as slow as that.

I am not trying to say Epsons are not good. They are good and that's why I still get them for different reasons.

 

[turbguy]

Again, I must point out...SPEED KILLS THERMAL PRINTHEADS! The slower, the better for the printhead. It probably applies to piezo printheads too...

Wayne

 

[Tin Ho]

Wayne, I almost laughed when I saw your post. I understand you are probably burnt by Canon before. So was I.

But honestly it isn't the speed that kills the printer. It is the process of refilling that isn't perfect that causes the problem. I have printed tons of paper through a few Canon printers. I managed to keep them alive without being burnt. I love the speed. Time is money. I need the speed. Epsons are slower not because they make them slow for safety reasons. I believe it is because of lower print head nozzle density that makes them slow. Being slow because of the print head it gives the printer time to print with precision. Epson definitely print excellent photos but they are truly slower comparing to Canons.

 

[turbguy]

I didn't say it was speed that kills the printer, I said it kills the printhead.

There's little doubt in my mind that OEM's push the speed as one of the significant metrics to gain market share.

The more rapidly a thermal printhead nozzle fires, the greater the local (microscopic) temperature rises. The higher the temperature, the higher the failure rate and the shorter the life of on ANY electronic device.

Similar to "overclocking" computers, the users are risking failure at the expense of speed.

If there are options in printer drivers to slow up printing (such as "quite modes"), they are worth serious consideration!

Want higher speeds? GET A SECOND (or third or fourth) PRINTER and split up the print jobs....

Wayne