[wgreene]

I have a Canon i850 printer which I have immensely enjoyed using these past four+ years. For one thing, I've never had even one paper-jam during that time.

My understanding always has been that it is best to have separate components, so that's why I've always owned a dedicated printer. However, it appears that the present-day trend is more toward all-in-one units. Actually, I'm in the market only for a printer, but if the Canon MP600 all-in-one is technologically advanced far beyond my i850, then I would strongly considering buying one.

The MP600 has a scanner (which I don't need, although it would provide me with a back-up) and it has several modern features of convenience which my i850 doesn't have. What I would especially like to know is whether or not the MP600 produces appreciably better results with both text and photos than my i850. Also, would it be faster and cheaper in the long run than the MP600? While quality of results is more important than anything else, speed, economy, and convenience also enter into the equation.

(I was also considering the Canon PIXMA iP6700D photo printer, but from what I've read so far it appears that the MP600 all-in-one is more highly-regarded.)

I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has an opinon on this matter. Thank you very much.

[buck52]

howdy

I don't have any of the printers you have mentioned but...

If you are looking for quality photo prints...stay away from any "all in one" printers

As a note... I use Epson printers with nothing but genuine Epson ink

buck

[slipe]

The text quality would probably be the same since they both have the same large pigmented black tank that is limited to 600 DPI. I doubt you would see any difference in photo quality. They are both basic utility printers with a large pigmented black plus cyan, yellow and magenta cartridges. Even the under $100 Canon printers like the iP4300 have an additional photo black, so the printer in the MP600 is really entry level.

I think the MP600 uses the Chromalife cartridges which are a little pricier. I’ve used both and don’t see a big difference.

Why would you consider a bottom feeding all in one when you evidently already have a decent scanner and printer. The scanner on the MP600 is about as bad as they come with its CIS sensors. About the only thing you will notice an upgrade to is your ink cartridge prices.

The MP960 is an interesting unit. I hope Canon carries the printer philosophy over to the regular inkjets. You have always had to choose between getting the large pigmented black tank or getting photo colors like photo cyan, photo magenta and photo black. You get somewhat better photo prints with the extra photo colors but text becomes expensive and relatively poor since the printer has to mix colors to get pure black. The MP960 is the first printer I’ve seen that has both a large pigmented black tank and photo colors. It also has a decent quality CCD scanner.

If you use your printer for office type duties and have space for only one printer I wouldn’t replace your i850 with a photo printer like the iP6700. If you have space to leave both hooked up it would be an upgrade in your photo quality to have the iP6700 and you could use your old printer for text and simple graphics.

[wgreene]

Originally Posted by slipe

The text quality would probably be the same since they both have the same large pigmented black tank that is limited to 600 DPI. I doubt you would see any difference in photo quality. They are both basic utility printers with a large pigmented black plus cyan, yellow and magenta cartridges. Even the under $100 Canon printers like the iP4300 have an additional photo black, so the printer in the MP600 is really entry level.

I think the MP600 uses the Chromalife cartridges which are a little pricier. I’ve used both and don’t see a big difference.

Why would you consider a bottom feeding all in one when you evidently already have a decent scanner and printer. The scanner on the MP600 is about as bad as they come with its CIS sensors. About the only thing you will notice an upgrade to is your ink cartridge prices.

The MP960 is an interesting unit. I hope Canon carries the printer philosophy over to the regular inkjets. You have always had to choose between getting the large pigmented black tank or getting photo colors like photo cyan, photo magenta and photo black. You get somewhat better photo prints with the extra photo colors but text becomes expensive and relatively poor since the printer has to mix colors to get pure black. The MP960 is the first printer I’ve seen that has both a large pigmented black tank and photo colors. It also has a decent quality CCD scanner.

If you use your printer for office type duties and have space for only one printer I wouldn’t replace your i850 with a photo printer like the iP6700. If you have space to leave both hooked up it would be an upgrade in your photo quality to have the iP6700 and you could use your old printer for text and simple graphics.

Thank you for the detailed explanation.

If I had the extra space I probably would get the iP6700 for photos. That certainly sounds like a good idea. Not having much room, though, I've decided to continue using my i850 indefinitely, either until it conks out or until an impossible-to-pass-up deal comes along.

Thanks again.

[jenin]

I heard that the printer Canon i850 is a good one and going to buy it soon. All the technical information is listed here.

[JStergis]

I've got a Canon S9000 ( http://www.steves-digicams.com/2002_...non_s9000.html ) and absolutely love it. My grandmother has a Canon i960 ( http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_...anon_i960.html ). Both print lab-quality photos, I wouldn't go with anything but a Canon for photo printing.

HOWEVER, I do think it is best to use individual components. They'll almost always do better than an AIO

Buck, I used to have a Stylus Photo EX, it appeared to print, but nothing would appear on the page, even with new cartridges. I couldn't find anything blocking the head, it all happened suddenly. I got a Canon S9000 for free, which beats it by leaps, but any clue why it did that?

[slipe]

I've got a Canon S9000

The S9000 is three generations back in Canon photo printer technology, but I’ve hung onto mine. Canon made a mistake with their Win98 driver in that you can choose photo quality prints from the banner menu. That lets you make high quality panoramas you can’t make with any other Canon printer. The downside is that you have to dual boot to Win98 or SE as the glitch isn’t in the XP driver.

Several people contacted Canon when they upgraded to XP to find out why they couldn’t print panoramas anymore. Canon replied that the Win98 ability was an error and they had no intention of revising the XP driver to allow it. No Canon printer since has allowed prints over 24 inches. That isn’t enough for a wide format printer like the S9000.

One of the regulars on another site encountered a Canon executive at a trade show and asked him about it. He was told that it would take them ten minutes to write a firmware update but that no Canon printer would print panoramas until Canon made panorama paper. They make their money selling paper and ink.

Their supposition is correct. Since I use Red River panorama paper I do most of my regular photo printing on Red River paper. And since I had to adapt to the Red River paper I profiled for MIS ink as well.

[JStergis]

I've never installed this on a 98 system, only 2k and XP. I've never printed bigger than 11X17 on it, the photos I do are primarily 4X6 or 8X10s, the 11X17s are generally just newsletter type things. I think it'll print 13 inches wide, so I imagine it would print absolutely beautiful 13X19 photos, but I've never tried. The only two papers I'll use for photos are Canon papers or Dell papers (whose results are very close to as good as on Canon paper)

Looking at my driver it'll let me do a 23.39 inch height, but no more. Only problem I have with Canon paper is that it's very expensive, but the quality is absolutely perfect. I'll hang onto it until it dies. I've read of the "Waste ink tank Full" errors and I dread that day, but I bet it'll be quite a while before that ever happens. I don't use it all that much, and basically only for photos. I've got a Brother HL-2040 for everything else and an HP PSC750 for simple color prints (but absolutely not photos).