Canon I-9900 Photo Printer
by Canon
|
List Price: Our Price: $150.00 You Save: $349.99 (70%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Category: CE See more product details |
|---|
Customers in the UK,
Buy this product at amazon.co.uk
for British Pounds
Digital Cameras Photo Reviews of Canon I-9900 Photo Printer
Customer Review: Knock, knock. Who's there? The printer of your dreams!
Summary: 5 Stars
Absolutely phenomenal print quality! That's what it all comes down to and this printer, by far, produces the best quality prints I've ever seen. The colors just jump right off the paper.
Usually the old axiom, "garbage in, garbage out" holds true the majority of the time, but I've printed out some relatively crappy pictures (not mine of course <g>) that have looked decidedly non-crappy once 'transmogrified' by this printer. Of course, this won't work miracles, but it will allow you to get the best possible results from whatever your photographic labors have been. So if you spend a great deal of time and effort in composing and exposing your photos, then play with them for hours in Photoshop to eek out just the right tonal balances and colors, it really is a shame to print it on some run of the mill bargain printer. I was so impressed by this printer that I've gone back and reprinted all of the photos that I had in my house. Photos that I had previously thought 'perfect'. After reprinting them on the Canon, they really are even 'more' perfect. :-)
I've been doing photography now for over thirty years. I've seen some relatively revolutionary changes in photography over that time, but until now I've lamented the fact that you couldn't get a proper color print outside of the darkroom. This printer changes that. Which is an entirely good thing because color printing in the darkroom is a major PITA (+/- 1 degree tolerance in your chemicals, CYMK filtering, etc..).
I've gone through quite a few inkjets over the past six or seven years and was, until recently, very pleased with the output from my HP 5550. I knew it wasn't top of the line, but for $99 a year ago, it was quite good. Then I got to thinking about all the time, effort and money I was spending on producing photographs, only to print them out on a so-so printer. I did extensive research and narrowed down my choices to the Canon i9900 and the 8450. Both use the _identical_ printhead and inks, but the 8450 only handles letter size paper and smaller. For an extra $150 I decided on the i9900 so that I could handle 13x19 and smaller. Well worth the extra money. The first huge 13x19 print you make of your favorite photo will convince you as well.
Okay, enough blathering, here are my impressions:
PROS:
- unreal color quality
- 8 ink cartridges. 8 separate colors are responsible for the outstanding color, but also allow you to replace only the color cart that runs out (not only environmentally sound, but also saves you some coin in the long run).
- FAST print speed
- Relatively straight paper path (can handle heavier weight papers and doesn't mangle the paper)
- Exceptionally quiet
- I've only used Kodak, Ilford and Canon papers, but the print quality was extremely similar on all of them. I've not had it long enough to comment on the fade-resistance, but Canon claims 25+ years.
CONS:
- BIG footprint. Once you have the input paper support and output tray folded out, it's like a satellite with its solar panels unfurled. Front to back is 34 inches. That's right, just two inches short of a yard. 23 inches wide sounds small in comparison. 14 inches deep with the solar panels folded up isn't bad, but you do need to unfold them when you print. This thing gives new meaning to desktop printing - you need an entire desk for it.
- Pricey. Perhaps I've just been spoiled by sub $200 printers, but it is a big leap to lay out $500 for an inkjet. Quality-wise, it seems exceptional. And of course, the end result of amazing prints is well worth it if you can afford it. And when you consider that I've spent over $2K on digital cameras and lenses, $4K on my Mac G5 and accessories, etc.., it seems silly to cheap out where the "rubber meets the road".
- I don't quite understand the need for a duplexing system on this type of printer. I would rather have that as an option and pay less for the main printer.
- Black and white prints just don't seem as good as darkroom results for the same picture. I believe this could be improved if Canon were to rewrite the drivers for this printer, but for now, I'm continuing my search for a good b&w inkjet.
So in conclusion, I really love this printer. Canon has really taken the lead in the photo-printing market and I can't see anyone else catching up anytime soon.
[...]
Customer Review: Outstanding !
Summary: 5 Stars
After having read all the customer reviews at "Amazon.com" and elsewhere, I figured this would be an excellent photo printer. I was not wrong. I gave it five stars and would not back off from that as it pertains to outright outstanding pictures. I have printed about 30 full page 8 1/2 photos (some with four 4 X 6 prints on each page) and one 13 X 19. Wow...! I did not have Canon paper for the 8 1/2 X 11 and used "Kodak Ultimate Picture Paper" I had purchased at "Sam's" earlier. I just cannot imagine the pictures looking any better using Canon Paper. The one 13 X 19 was printed on "Canon Photo Paper Pro" and it was beyond any expectations I may have had. I did use the "vivid" printing mode via the software which came with the printer and it really seemed to give the photo even more life than the original shot. I have not yet decided if I will use the "vivid" mode when printing pictures of people.
Now, I would hesitate to write a review without including my feelings about any of these printers which have been designed for the consumer market and therefore priced under $1,000. Why do they all insist in putting such small cartridges in the great printers? A good lawyer would know the answer to that question before it was asked in court and while I am certainly no lawyer, the answer can only be that they want to have a built in profit center as long as we have the printers. OK, while I understand the reason, I just don't understand why they would not mark the price up a bit and give us printer cartridges with at least 10 times the ink.
If you do buy this printer and plan on using it for anything other than just occasional prints, you may as well go ahead and order another set of cartridges when you order the printer. If you want to save a few dollars, as others have also commented on, spend that same amount of money for about 3 additional colors of the "Photo Magenta BCI-6PM" and the "Photo Cyan BCI-6PC". (about $10 each) After printing the photos mentioned earlier, there has been no noticable drop in any of the cartridges other than these two. The printer cartridge profile is showing these as already half gone.
I have been hesitant to consider any after market inks at this time because I just do not want to have to buy a new printer head (about $160) nor risk ending up with more fade than expected over the next few years. If any other reviewers have had excellent experience in this area I would like to hear about it.
Regarding the cost of having a photo lab print your pictures versus doing it yourself on this outstanding printer, I just cannnot imagine them looking any better and secondly, you just have more control of your print when you do it yourself. If you are just getting started, it make take a while to get your prints to the point where you are pleased with them, however, I pretty much went "right out of the box" and used the Canon software and prints I have saved over the last five years. Of course, if you are concerned about having them fade over the next 10 years or so or, if your are doing professional level work and your customers demand a more permanent ink, then perhaps a professional lab would be more appropriate for those special prints, however, for most of the work many of us will be doing, this printer really should fulfill the needs of 95 % of our photo printing needs.
A word or two about the photos I have printed as it relates to the megapixel size of the my first few prints. I printed many from older photos taken with my "Kodak DC 4800" and saved at maximum resolution. (It is a 3.1 megapixel camera). Those prints have been great and I would not hesitate to print away at this resolution. The larger prints were mostly taken with my Canon 20D and obviously I had more control over my photos regarding lens choices, photo editing and printing due simply to the fact that it is an 8 megapixal camera and it gives me many more options if the photo needs cropping, etc.
I notice that "Amazon.com" has just dropped the price by $20 but I do not know if they still have free shipping, regardless, I have not found a better price "to the door" so it still looks like the best deal on the market for the money.
Customer Review: Soooo Much Better than my Epsons
Summary: 5 Stars
Had this printer about 1 month now. Had several Epson models previously. Before I decided to make the Canon switch I took my laptop to the store and printed out some color and black and white calibration charts along with actual photographs on the i9900 and some Epson 13" wide models. WOW, I was really surprised to see how much better the Canon photos were. Not even close! So then I started worrying about pigment inks vs dye inks and longevity. To make a long story short: Man does Epson have everyone snowed. First of all, regular photos from the photolab even professionaly done ones don't last as long as prints from either of these 2 printers. Sure the Epson pigment inks probably do last a very long time, but does it matter if your prints look like they were printed on an Epson instead of this Canon i9900?! The Canon prints are rated at 35 years. Plenty long enough for me. I decided to test myself, so I printed out an image, poured water all over one quarter of it. The ink didn't smear, fade, or do anything. It was perfectly durable! And this was with Canon ink on Epson Photo Quality Ink Jet Paper. Repeated the test on other papers and NO PROBLEM WITH WATER AND CANON INKS! In the real world no one is going to pour water over their prints anyway.... So on to the fade issue. Made another test print and covered half of it up with card board and taped it to the glass of a window facing South in my house. Now I live in Denver with VERY intense sun light and UV light! So I thought this would be a torture test for it. Half the image was beaten by sunlight on bright sunny days for a week. The results: no visually apparent fade! So if you print out nice stuff, frame it, put it behind glass, hang it in a normal lit room... it probably is possible to get a good 35 years out your print. Who really knows anyway?
This Canon printer has more "guts" inside it than my previous Epsons. For example it will do the head alignment routine semi-autmatically by scanning what it just printed using a sensor on the print head (some HP inkjets do this also). There seems to be a lot more thought and detail in the paper feed pathway too. Ink cartridges are easier to change than on the Epsons (minor detail). The print head is easily changed (major detail). The thing IS MUCH QUIETER PRINTING THAN ANY EPSON I HAVE EVER HEARD! Not to mention FASTER.
The Color profiles supplied with the Canon factory driver are VERY accurate. I have always had custom profiles made, and probably still will, but these are the best I have ever seen to come with the printer out of the box.
Canon's photo paper pro isn't much better from an image quality perspective than the Photo Glossy Plus.
Your old collection of Epson papers will work for fooling around with this printer, but not for your important stuff. For example, the Canon black ink reacts with the Epson papers (several) to produce a brown/black tone. On Canon paper however, the black is very neutral.
And for a finale: The reason this printer does so well (even with B/W, yes B/W) is the dots are truely very small and the vertical resolution very high at 2400 dpi. The reason "some printers" use ink cartridges containing shades of gray, is not to compete with John Cohn and [...] for B/W printing, but because they don't have the fine droplets and high resolution required to make a single black color work well for grayscale. The Canon i9900 does a surprisingly fantastic job at black and white. When using composite black with all the colors, the overall tone is slightly warm but not much. No metermism, no blotchy areas of strange rainbow colors, etc, etc. Just smooth even tone. When printing B/W with only Black (option in driver), you get a very neutral tone... and on glossy paper anyway, you can't see the dots and it produces a very smooth gray scale. I printed out a continous gray scale before buying the printer. EXCELLENT job in both black only and composite black.! Well done Canon! For image quality this printer has no equal!
The only thing you loose when you buy this printer, is a life of print head clogs from using those darn pigment inks. I have no problems with the Canon i9900 dye based inks.
Customer Review: 2 years and it still rocks!
Summary: 5 Stars
I bought this printer nearly 2 years ago specifically for its wide-format printing ability, but it has proven itself over and over as an excellent photo printer. I use it to print 11x17 and 4x6 and everything in between. And it's still printing great prints.
I use the 11x17 to print a family birthday/anniversary calendar, using high-resolution high-bright paper, and my only problem with this is that the paper itself curls when I print photos on it, simply because it gets saturated with ink. Not too much of a problem when printing on one side only, but for double-sided printing I would recommend using a heavier paper or card stock. (This is true for any inkjet printer if you are printing anything other than text.)
The genuine Canon ink can be found for reasonable prices. If you are buying a printer this high-end, you shouldn't use the cheap ink in it, it's just not worth it. You will get many MANY prints out of one set of ink tanks, but be sure to ignore the "ink out" warnings and eyeball the ink yourself... if you can still see saturation in the sponge you still have ink left. I've found that, depending on the ink color and the amount of color in my photos, I can get anywhere from 10 to 50 4x6 prints or 5-10 11x17 pages out of an "empty" ink tank. Photo Cyan seems to need replacing more often than the others, so if you find ink on sale buy extra Photo Cyan and Photo Magenta (the 2nd most used color). Warning: The Red and Green ink tanks are not carried in many stores so once you get the ink warning on Red or Green, go online and order a new one because you probably won't be able to buy one locally when it finally does run out. The good news is that the printer uses so little Red and Green that even if you print lots and lots of prints frequently, you only need to keep one of each on hand. Personally, I keep as spares: 1 Green, 1 Red, 2 Black, 2 Cyan, 2 Magenta, 2 Yellow, 3 Photo Magenta, 3-4 Photo Cyan.
Cheap photo paper vs. Name Brand photo paper: Your mileage may vary. I have found that certain brands of cheap paper perform better than the name brand types. If you print a lot of photos you will appreciate not shelling out $boatloads for expensive paper, especially for 4x6 prints. I don't recommend HP photo paper, it produces somewhat muddy results. I have had great results from Kodak Premium 8.5 x 11 provided the original photo is high enough resolution... 4 megapixels at the absolute minimum. I have also had excellent results from LD Premium Glossy 4x6 paper. (I have not tried the LD 8.5x11 paper)
Like every other Canon inkjet printer I have ever owned, the i9900 can get a little OCD when it comes to "getting ready to print". Most of the time the printer fires up quickly and if you send a lot of files to the printer at the same time they will print back-to-back with no delay, unless you use the driver's "ink dry" function to delay the next page for an amount of time you specify to allow the previous page to dry. But sometimes the printer decides it needs to clean itself or recalibrate itself after every page, that can get irritating.
I do have a beef with the printer driver: it wants to "fix" every photo, even if you are deliberately printing something "washed-out" it will darken it. And you can't really turn that off. There is a "manual color correction" function but it is very tedious and convoluted and doesn't work very well. Canon probably does this so they can claim that the printer doesn't print any bad photos, but it won't even let you print a "bad" photo on purpose. Not many people will likely have a problem with this, I have a specific reason for wanting to print a washed-out photo on occasion.
Customer Review: A solid asset for serious digital photogs.
Summary: 5 Stars
Two or three years ago, I got my first digital camera - a Canon 5D. Then, my next purchase was this printer. I looked at all the printers they had at Best Buy and some were very impressive and much cheaper than this unit. But, I was looking for a high quality photo printer and not a swiss army knife and this was the top of the line Canon unit that enjoyed excellent reviews.
Still, as my first foray into digital printing, I had to rely on the reviews which stated that the 8 ink system along with the ability to print fine detail resulted in prints of high quality. Finally, with some trepidation, I took the plunge and selected the i9900 and half expected to discover compromised results.
Well, this is what I found: Coupled with Adobe CS3, Canon print paper and some experimentation, I have been able to garner about 8 first place ribbons in photo contests in the time since I first began working with it.
It was easy to install the software on my laptop and the printer faithfully reproduces both color and B/W images. I am particularly pleased with the b/w, because I just didn't expect to see the subtle tones, clarity and life I had discovered in "wet" printing.
Of course, I am stunned by the brilliant and accurate colors that of which the printer is capable, including jaw-dropping reds that recreate the original scene without the Kodachrome contrast. Since I often like to introduce a little abstractness to the images with Photoshop filters, I am pleased that the more interpretive images are rendered accurately as well.
As you can tell, this is not a technical review, but there are technical considerations to be made. One is the software that comes with the printer. Generally, the Canon software seems to be designed for someone who is likely to want to produce a lot of candids. That is, there are good cataloging and print setup utilites and so forth.
Image acquisition (at least from Canon cameras) is straightforward and easy. You can print borderless or bordered prints on any sized paper up to 13" x 19" and so forth. My only difficulty has been matching the color space to the Photoshop. I still have problems getting the printer to reproduce the brightness I see in the monitor image without adding a stop or so more brightness to the image before printing it.
That can result in some wasted paper and makes precise duplication of previously printed files difficult. Frankly, I think that's a shortcoming of mine and not the printer. Also, this is not a fast printer when you are working with the larger print sizes, but that may be of much greater importance to those wishing to do a lot of candids rather than a few so-called "art" prints. Personally, I spend a lot more time preparing the image than printing it.
Actually, I have only one beef with the printer and that's simply that I wish it would print full 16" x 20" prints. Well, for that matter, I'd like to be able to buy 11" x 14" paper, also. Then, I would have what used to be standard sized prints. I think that would reduce some matting and framing difficulties.
I have seen some salon prints that I'm not sure I could duplicate with this printer, but I assume that they have been produced on a much more expensive color lab device. For now, I am still exploring the possibilities of this very good unit, but eagerly waiting to see what Canon comes up with next.