Photo quality comparison: 3 vs 5 ink XP models

[te36]

I bought an XP-820 using it with EV6 ink and am quite happy with it.

Now i wanted to get a second printer for another location where photos are more important, and also A3. So i wonder whether to get an XP-900 that uses 4 colors for photos (CMYK) or the XP-960 that uses six colors for photos (CMYlClMK).

Any examples/posts/other references how they would compare in print results specifically on A4/A3 ? Eg: i wonder if the difference in fine graded color differences would not rather become less and less important the larger the print is, and therefore the more dots can be used for every original pixel.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

I would go for the XP-900, you won't see any difference to the XP-960 with the light inks. All models you are listing up use small 1.5pl droplets which is below visibility. I have tested and I'm using various models like the R800 without light colors or the L800 with light colors, gamuts are comparable when used with the same inks. And I don't see differences even with the WF2010W with dye inks. You may compare the XP-900 and XP-960 if they differ in some other aspect like paper handling, connectivity or else which may be relevant to you. There is one thing I don't like with these models - the cartridge ink capacity is pretty small for an A3 printer which will let you change them rather quickly. The XP-900 uses Claria inks, the XP-960 a Claria HD ink, I don't know whether there is any visible improvement with the HD inks. And since you are most likely using refill inks this would not matter anyway.

 

[The Hat]

Get yourself a Pro 100 when they are on discount and save yourself a lot of good dollars, this machine won’t let you down because it’s pretty much leading the field in A3 photo printers, and don’t for heavens sake go chasing after dots and pixels, there just a myth and don’t belong in any good photo setup...

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

Those XP models are not feeding A3 via the paper bin but only via single feed from the back, if you use A3 somewhat more frequently you may better look for another model - more like the Canon Pro100

 

[te36]

I would go for the XP-900... You may compare the XP-900 and XP-960 if they differ in some other aspect ... The XP-900 uses Claria inks, the XP-960 a Claria HD ink, I don't know whether there is any visible improvement with the HD inks. And since you are most likely using refill inks this would not matter anyway.

Thanks.

XP-900 does not have ethernet, but that should be fine. The XP-820 is now running also via wifi and that seems to not cause any trouble. But i have not checked exactly what powersave options there are. Eg: No idea if the printers have WoL, then ethernet would be nice.

The XP-900 also uses the latest generation of chips (like XP-830) for which there are no ubiquitous ARC equivalents. But it seems at least in europe region the first ARC chips are available for T33 cartridges (seemingly not yet for US region T410, but the XP-900 isn't available in the US anyhow). I wish Epson would start to wake up from this chip mess and offer the option of buying a "chipfree" upgrade license for their printers.

And yes, i wouldn't consider buying a printer for photos without the ability to use third-party ink. I also do not buy cars where i could only use manufacturer gasoline.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

'chipfree' - that's what the Ecotank models with the integrated tank systems offer - you pay a premium upfront, but you don't have any hazzles with cartridges, chips , cleaning cycles after every refill etc.
The L1800 is the A3 tank system photo model, the A3 L1300 does not offer borderless printing, although the predesessor B1100 did, that's when marketing starts cutting features .

 

[te36]

Get yourself a Pro 100 when they are on discount and save yourself a lot of good dollars, this machine won’t let you down because it’s pretty much leading the field in A3 photo printers, and don’t for heavens sake go chasing after dots and pixels, there just a myth and don’t belong in any good photo setup...

The B&H photo price of 129 for the Pixma 100 is certainly very tempting.
I just can't figure out what benefit i would leverage:

I think I do not need A3+. I do not need A3 in volume. SIngle paper feed should be fine.
I would still need another device for scanning, duplex printing.
Two devices give me more space trouble. And Pixma itself needs a lot more space.
The Pixma is also dye, so color stability would not be different. And photos would mostly be glossy anyhow.

Refill of Pixma is nicer with manual reset vs. ARC (easier to minimize clean cycles).
But... not enough of a difference IMHO.

I don't think i need to do greyscale, and supposedly, good profiling should make the 3-color printers also neutral for greyscale prints. And with epsons 1.5 dot size with photo black...

Aka, question is: How much better would photo quality be with a pixma 100....vs the epsons ?
A3/A4 glossy photos, non grayscale only.

 

[te36]

'chipfree' - that's what the Ecotank models with the integrated tank systems offer - you pay a premium upfront, but you don't have any hazzles with cartridges, chips , cleaning cycles after every refill etc.
The L1800 is the A3 tank system photo model, the A3 L1300 does not offer borderless printing, although the predesessor B1100 did, that's when marketing starts cutting features .

Thats not what i meant. Those CISS printers are great, and if i had the volume, i would go for them. I was thinking just of any of the existing cartridge printers but at a higher printer price so that you could put any third-party and/or refill cartridge in.

Ecotank/CISS is a necessarily a more expensive HW design. If you want to print in total maybe 1000 A4 photos, you don't need that and it doesn't necessarily give you more value: Almost all Ecotank seem to have 3.3 pl instead of 1.5 pl. Which makes a lot of sense if the print head is to be built more sturdy for the high CISS volume. Likewise the whole CISS construct, getting ink to the head. And swapping cartridges might still be less trouble than touching any ink depending on who you are (i am thinking of specific family members).

The L1800 seems to print borderless up to A3+ if i can believe various web-pages. But it seems to not be an official USA/Germany printer, so i wonder about support issues. And if if at that price level i think it shold have user swappable waste tank and print head.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

There are various L800, L805,L810, L850 models and the L1800 all running as photo printers borderless with 1.5pl. The printhead is no different to the base models , Epson printheads last very long.
If you profile an Epson or a Canon Pro100 for the same paper you wouldn't see a difference on glossy paper. You may see some differences in the gamut, a slightly better black level here or there, or differences in the dithering smooth color ranges when viewed with a magnifier.
If you are going for refill and you are concerned about ink fading you have more choices for Epson than for Canon besides their Chromalife inks. The paper handling with the Pro-100 appears to be more flexible and reliable than the A3 single feed mode of the XP models. There may be differences in connectivity , smartphone apps etc. And you are addressing space needs which could be a limiting factor.

 

[te36]

None of these L models shows up on epsons German web page. Nor on its US web page. Poland and China do have them though for roughly the same prices. Chip slaves vs. free ink flow countries ?

The 8xx series is A4 only. The difference between the A3+ L1300 and L1800 series really seems to be 3.3 vs 1.5 pl and 4 vs. 6 colors. So there does not seem to be a single A3 ITS 4 color 1.5 pl printer.

There is a good range of ET series products in DE/US but they are all 3.3 pl and three is only one doing A3 and thats a full A3 device including scanner == large.

Any idea how to describe the photo quality difference between 4 color photo, eg: A4 1.5 vs. 3.3 pl ? Am i overestimating the benefit of 1.5 pl ?