Quality of a IP3000 vs S600

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I now have a S600.
I am considering a new IP3000. But I read the review that the colour
printout is not very good. My question is: Is it better than the S600
?

Thanks.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"dingdongdingding@yahoo.com" <dingdongdingding@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1109516313.129643.236450@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

> I now have a S600.
> I am considering a new IP3000. But I read the review that the colour
> printout is not very good. My question is: Is it better than the S600
> ?
>

The iP3000 is about the same as the S600. So what's the point of moving
up if you're not actually moving up. A step up would be the Ip4000. And one
more step closer to lab film output would be the iP5000 which I have.
Nothing compares to it. Not even its cousin, the very good i860!

Trust me!!!!!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Well my S600 is not printing anymore. Since I'm happy with the output,
I can get something similar.

I'm trying to avoid the 2nd black dye cartridge. I think it will be a
hassle FOR ME.


AA Battery wrote:
> "dingdongdingding@yahoo.com" <dingdongdingding@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:1109516313.129643.236450@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>
> > I now have a S600.
> > I am considering a new IP3000. But I read the review that the
colour
> > printout is not very good. My question is: Is it better than the
S600
> > ?
> >
>
> The iP3000 is about the same as the S600. So what's the point of
moving
> up if you're not actually moving up. A step up would be the Ip4000.
And one
> more step closer to lab film output would be the iP5000 which I have.

> Nothing compares to it. Not even its cousin, the very good i860!
>
> Trust me!!!!!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Oh. I see. So if I print a photo using the IP3000, the black colour
does not come from the black pigment ink but a mixture of the 3 other
colours.

What if I use ordinary paper, is it still the same case ?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

dingdongdingding@yahoo.com wrote:
> I now have a S600.
> I am considering a new IP3000. But I read the review that the colour
> printout is not very good. My question is: Is it better than the
> S600 ?
>
> Thanks.

I don't know features of s600, but i do advice you to think twice before
buying anything and look also for ip4000. It has better photos because of
extra photo black.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

AA Battery wrote:
> "dingdongdingding@yahoo.com" <dingdongdingding@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:1109516313.129643.236450@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>
>> I now have a S600.
>> I am considering a new IP3000. But I read the review that the colour
>> printout is not very good. My question is: Is it better than the
>> S600 ?
>>
>
> The iP3000 is about the same as the S600. So what's the point of
> moving
> up if you're not actually moving up. A step up would be the Ip4000.
> And one more step closer to lab film output would be the iP5000 which
> I have. Nothing compares to it. Not even its cousin, the very good
> i860!
>
> Trust me!!!!!

Som reviews say not...although not many people have both printers to be able
to compare and confirm or deny this fact, but supposely ip5000 has better
text while ip4000 has better photos. BTW...my ip4000 also have lab
comparable output, if not better.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

While the IP5000 is significantly better on business documents it is
marginally inferior in photo quality to the IP4000 and somewhat slower
as well. The IP4000 is a better choice.

AA Battery wrote:

>"dingdongdingding@yahoo.com" <dingdongdingding@yahoo.com> wrote in
>news:1109516313.129643.236450@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
>>I now have a S600.
>>I am considering a new IP3000. But I read the review that the colour
>>printout is not very good. My question is: Is it better than the S600
>>?
>>
>>
>>
>
>The iP3000 is about the same as the S600. So what's the point of moving
>up if you're not actually moving up. A step up would be the Ip4000. And one
>more step closer to lab film output would be the iP5000 which I have.
>Nothing compares to it. Not even its cousin, the very good i860!
>
>Trust me!!!!!
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I'm confused by your reply. Is IP3000 comparable to S600 or inferior ?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

<dingdongdingding@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1109516313.129643.236450@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>I now have a S600.
> I am considering a new IP3000. But I read the review that the colour
> printout is not very good. My question is: Is it better than the S600
> ?
>

I have an iP3000 and the photo quality is excellent so 'I' would question
the review.
If your S600 is working and you are just looking to move up I would say go
for a iP4000 or iP5000.
If your S600 has died and you are replacing, the iP4000 will give you
comparable prints with some increase in speed.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

<dingdongdingding@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1109546775.224524.62690@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Well my S600 is not printing anymore. Since I'm happy with the output,
> I can get something similar.
>
> I'm trying to avoid the 2nd black dye cartridge. I think it will be a
> hassle FOR ME.
>
>

If you are in the states call Canon's technical support.
They have a Customer Loyalty Program that will provide you a discount and
free Next Day delivery to your door if you replace your previous Canon with
another canon.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

There is only one dye cart in the IP4000 and that is used for photos.
The other is a pigment cart used for text. The IP3000 does not have a
photo dye cart so it has to mix them. Therefore it uses more color ink
and the contrast in the shadows is not as good.

dingdongdingding@yahoo.com wrote:

>Well my S600 is not printing anymore. Since I'm happy with the output,
>I can get something similar.
>
>I'm trying to avoid the 2nd black dye cartridge. I think it will be a
>hassle FOR ME.
>
>
>AA Battery wrote:
>
>
>>"dingdongdingding@yahoo.com" <dingdongdingding@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>news:1109516313.129643.236450@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I now have a S600.
>>>I am considering a new IP3000. But I read the review that the
>>>
>>>
>colour
>
>
>>>printout is not very good. My question is: Is it better than the
>>>
>>>
>S600
>
>
>>>?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>The iP3000 is about the same as the S600. So what's the point of
>>
>>
>moving
>
>
>>up if you're not actually moving up. A step up would be the Ip4000.
>>
>>
>And one
>
>
>>more step closer to lab film output would be the iP5000 which I have.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>Nothing compares to it. Not even its cousin, the very good i860!
>>
>>Trust me!!!!!
>>
>>
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I am not sure but I think that the print driver recognizes the source
and react accordingly.

dingdongdingding@yahoo.com wrote:

>Oh. I see. So if I print a photo using the IP3000, the black colour
>does not come from the black pigment ink but a mixture of the 3 other
>colours.
>
>What if I use ordinary paper, is it still the same case ?
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

The IP3000 will print a very decent photo but the IP4000 will be much
better and save on color ink.

PC Medic wrote:

><dingdongdingding@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:1109516313.129643.236450@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>>I now have a S600.
>>I am considering a new IP3000. But I read the review that the colour
>>printout is not very good. My question is: Is it better than the S600
>>?
>>
>>
>>
>
>I have an iP3000 and the photo quality is excellent so 'I' would question
>the review.
>If your S600 is working and you are just looking to move up I would say go
>for a iP4000 or iP5000.
>If your S600 has died and you are replacing, the iP4000 will give you
>comparable prints with some increase in speed.
>
>
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

<dingdongdingding@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1109571289.271932.292510@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I'm confused by your reply. Is IP3000 comparable to S600 or inferior ?
>

iP3000 would be 'Better' than S600.
Faster and higher resolution.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

In article dingdongdingding@yahoo.com says...
> I'm confused by your reply. Is IP3000 comparable to S600 or inferior ?
>
>
The iP3000 uses similar inks, BCI-6 C,M,Y instead of BCI-3e but higher
resolution for colours so it will be slightly better.

 

[BURT]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

If you can still find a canon i960 at a reduced price, go for it. I bought
two of them a few months ago and the photo results are excellent.

<dingdongdingding@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1109516313.129643.236450@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>I now have a S600.
> I am considering a new IP3000. But I read the review that the colour
> printout is not very good. My question is: Is it better than the S600
> ?
>
> Thanks.
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

The sales person told me this.

ip3000 uses more ink than ip4000.

THe reason is that it has to combine the 3 colours to product black.
So for a black colour, all three ink are used. But for ip4000, there
is a dedicated black colour.

so for black colour, ip3000 uses 2 times more ink than ip4000.

sounds logical. any truths ?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Using more ink to achieve the same result, isn't that simply use more
ink ? For a single "dot" (pardon my terminology), ip4000 squirt 1 time
and ip3000 squirt 3 time.

So assuming I print all black. I use up 1 cartridge on the ip4000 but
I use up 3 cartridges on the ip3000.

Right ??


PC Medic wrote:
> So while the iP3000 'may' use additional color inks to achieve a
composite
> black within a photo, the iP4000 would instead use its BCI-6Bk for
the same
> area on that same photo. So it is not that the iP3000 uses 'more'
ink, just
> different inks to achieve the same (or similar) result.

 

[Larry]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

In article <1110713780.266334.317690@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
dingdongdingding@yahoo.com says...
> The sales person told me this.
>
> ip3000 uses more ink than ip4000.
>
> THe reason is that it has to combine the 3 colours to product black.
> So for a black colour, all three ink are used. But for ip4000, there
> is a dedicated black colour.
>
> so for black colour, ip3000 uses 2 times more ink than ip4000.
>
> sounds logical. any truths ?
>

Actually it depends on what you print.

The 4000 has a dedicated pigmented black cartidge that is used if you are
printing just monochrome TEXT or TEXT & monochrome graphics, IF and only if
you set the driver for black only.

Im not sure about the 3000 as I dont have one but I dont think it has that
dedicated cartridge.

Whether it does or not, it will use the SAME amount of ink, but it may be
using it from fewer cartridges, making them run out sooner.

In other words, the "salesman" is just that, a salesman with no actual
knowledge of printers, but a good handle on the bottom line.

I can tell you the 4000 is a great printer, but the ink isnt a "free ride" on
any ink jet printer. If you put it on the paper, it wont be in the
cartridges.


--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

<dingdongdingding@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1110713780.266334.317690@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> The sales person told me this.
>
> ip3000 uses more ink than ip4000.
>
> THe reason is that it has to combine the 3 colours to product black.
> So for a black colour, all three ink are used. But for ip4000, there
> is a dedicated black colour.
>
> so for black colour, ip3000 uses 2 times more ink than ip4000.
>
> sounds logical. any truths ?
>

Yes and no.

The iP3000 and iP4000 both contain a BCI-3eBk pigmented black tank which is
designed for use when printing black text. They both use 2 - 5 picoliter
droplets and both use same 'basic' driver functions.

Where the difference comes in is that the iP4000 also incorporates a BCI-6Bk
ink tank which is used for photo printing, while its BCI-3eBk is used for
black text.

So while the iP3000 'may' use additional color inks to achieve a composite
black within a photo, the iP4000 would instead use its BCI-6Bk for the same
area on that same photo. So it is not that the iP3000 uses 'more' ink, just
different inks to achieve the same (or similar) result.

Also one needs to keep in mind that also by design, these printers will BOTH
use the BCI-3 for photo black IF the driver is set to 'Plain Paper'. This of
course is not recommended as the pigmented black tends to have a 'blotchy'
look if you have a large area of a dark color in the image.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

The IP4000 has an extra dye black. This is used when printing photos
and increases contrast as well as eliminates the mixing of colors to
produce rich black; thus reducing the using of the 3 colors. The IP4000
produces somewhat better photos and is worth the extra few dollars.

Larry wrote:

>In article <1110713780.266334.317690@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
>dingdongdingding@yahoo.com says...
>
>
>>The sales person told me this.
>>
>>ip3000 uses more ink than ip4000.
>>
>>THe reason is that it has to combine the 3 colours to product black.
>>So for a black colour, all three ink are used. But for ip4000, there
>>is a dedicated black colour.
>>
>>so for black colour, ip3000 uses 2 times more ink than ip4000.
>>
>>sounds logical. any truths ?
>>
>>
>>
>
>Actually it depends on what you print.
>
>The 4000 has a dedicated pigmented black cartidge that is used if you are
>printing just monochrome TEXT or TEXT & monochrome graphics, IF and only if
>you set the driver for black only.
>
>Im not sure about the 3000 as I dont have one but I dont think it has that
>dedicated cartridge.
>
>Whether it does or not, it will use the SAME amount of ink, but it may be
>using it from fewer cartridges, making them run out sooner.
>
>In other words, the "salesman" is just that, a salesman with no actual
>knowledge of printers, but a good handle on the bottom line.
>
>I can tell you the 4000 is a great printer, but the ink isnt a "free ride" on
>any ink jet printer. If you put it on the paper, it wont be in the
>cartridges.
>
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

dingdongdingding@yahoo.com wrote:
> Using more ink to achieve the same result, isn't that simply use more
> ink ? For a single "dot" (pardon my terminology), ip4000 squirt 1
> time and ip3000 squirt 3 time.
>
> So assuming I print all black. I use up 1 cartridge on the ip4000 but
> I use up 3 cartridges on the ip3000.
>
> Right ??


assuming you mean you print photo which is all black...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

<dingdongdingding@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1110726816.335891.122490@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Using more ink to achieve the same result, isn't that simply use more
> ink ? For a single "dot" (pardon my terminology), ip4000 squirt 1 time
> and ip3000 squirt 3 time.
>
> So assuming I print all black. I use up 1 cartridge on the ip4000 but
> I use up 3 cartridges on the ip3000.
>
> Right ??
>

No, because it is not quite that simple.

First, dot placement is not a one for one trade off so you are not firing
three dots (one of each color) for every one dot that would be fired from a
black ink tank. Also, the amount of ink needed to achieve a given color
shade/hue or even black is dependent on the paper type selected and can
vary. I personally have a S520, iP3000 and i560. All are used regularly for
similar printing (text, graphics, photos, etc) and none goes through a
particular color and a more frequent rate than the other.

>
> PC Medic wrote:
>> So while the iP3000 'may' use additional color inks to achieve a
> composite
>> black within a photo, the iP4000 would instead use its BCI-6Bk for
> the same
>> area on that same photo. So it is not that the iP3000 uses 'more'
> ink, just
>> different inks to achieve the same (or similar) result.
>