Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Epson R200 Vs Canon Pixma iP3000

Last response: in Computer Peripherals
Share
June 14, 2005 3:23:05 AM

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

I want to buy a basic photo printer.

R200 and iP3000 seem to have same price. I think R200 has five color and
one black ink tanks whereas iP3000 has three color and one black tanks.

Which one is better for quality of prints and trouble free operations?

Thanks in advance.
June 14, 2005 3:23:06 AM

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

> R200 and iP3000 seem to have same price. I think R200 has five color and
> one black ink tanks whereas iP3000 has three color and one black tanks.

I own both.

The r200 has extra light cyan and light magenta
The r300 is the same but has the fancy screen and pictbridge
The ip3000 has the usual black cyan magenta yellow, smaller drop size
The ip4000 has two blacks and the usual inks 2pl
The ip5000 has the same but smaller 1pl ink drop size.
The ip6000 has a larger 2pl but offers the light cyan/magenta inks

I leaned tward the r200 for out of the box print accuracy. It worked
fine for 6 months before it clogged and overflowed with ink. Your
experence could be better, but in the past the epsons clogged easily.
I'm told this one is better. But if you really like the Epson r200,
and you buy OEM ink, it's only typicaly $25 extra to get the printer
with ink than just ink.

For trouble free i'm taking a chance on the Canon. I bought the ip3000
cause the r200 was in the shop, and it was cheeper for the printer than
the ink for the r200. I've not owned it as long so I can't report any
trouble, but it at least has a detachable head and a diaper I can
replace unlike the epson. I bought mine in the hopes of enabling the
CD tray option so I bought the cheapest model. Otherwise i'd go with
an ip4000 mininium, likely the ip5000.
Anonymous
June 14, 2005 7:41:38 AM

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

IP4000 for a few bucks more. Be sure to use Canon inks.

Jeff wrote:

>I want to buy a basic photo printer.
>
>R200 and iP3000 seem to have same price. I think R200 has five color and
>one black ink tanks whereas iP3000 has three color and one black tanks.
>
>Which one is better for quality of prints and trouble free operations?
>
>Thanks in advance.
>
>
>
>
Related resources
June 14, 2005 7:41:39 AM

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

measekite wrote:

> IP4000 for a few bucks more. Be sure to use Canon inks.

It seems you only post here to get your daily dose of attention.
Beyond that your experience is limited to one printer and the use of
very overpriced OEM ink carts.
If you have had any other experience we would certainly like to hear
about the outcome but to keep repeating the same thing over and over
again is extremely boring and marks you as a self-indulgent troll.
Is that a fair description of you?
Frank
June 14, 2005 8:16:58 AM

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

"measekite" <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote in message
news:Slsre.719$NU5.243@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> IP4000 for a few bucks more. Be sure to use Canon inks.

I don't know why Measekite adds the last sentence as it is just an
invitation for someone to tell you that there are also some good aftermarket
cartridges and inks. He just can't leave well enough alone! If Measekite
only gave you advice about the printer and didn't add the ink advice I
wouldn't bother to respond. You need to know, if you were at all interested
in inks other than Canon, that Measekite is the last person on the face of
the earth to listen to regarding inks as he has never used aftermarket inks
or bought from any of the aftermarket ink vendors. It appears that his
mission in life is to deny what several of us have found out from using
them - that there are some good reliable non-Canon inks available from
selected internet vendors. He does own the IP4000 and advises everyone to
buy that printer. On that issue he does speak from his own experience.

I refill cartridges for my Canon i960 with MIS inks and some of the
participants in this newsgroup use cartridges filled with Formulabs inks or
refill with Formulabs inks from Alotofthings. Postings from Ron Cohen and
Taliesyn on this Newsgroup have some information about their personal
experience with aftermarket inks and you can also go to the following
forum - http://www.nifty-stuff.com/forum/ for some interesting information
about inks, printer maintenance, etc. You can also follow the link to Neil's
ink and printer information that you will find at the top of the Nifty-stuff
forum home page. Most of this forum is about Canon printers.


>
> Jeff wrote:
>
>>I want to buy a basic photo printer.
>>
>>R200 and iP3000 seem to have same price. I think R200 has five color and
>>one black ink tanks whereas iP3000 has three color and one black tanks.
>>
>>Which one is better for quality of prints and trouble free operations?
>>
>>Thanks in advance.
>>
>>
June 14, 2005 10:19:22 AM

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

Your royalty cheque from Canon is in the mai!!
Tony

measekite <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote:
>IP4000 for a few bucks more. Be sure to use Canon inks.
>
>Jeff wrote:
>
>>I want to buy a basic photo printer.
>>
>>R200 and iP3000 seem to have same price. I think R200 has five color and
>>one black ink tanks whereas iP3000 has three color and one black tanks.
>>
>>Which one is better for quality of prints and trouble free operations?
>>
>>Thanks in advance.
>>
>>
>>
>>
Anonymous
June 14, 2005 9:17:02 PM

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

Ah, Frankie Crankie the cockroach comes out of the woodwork.

Frank wrote:

> measekite wrote:
>
>> IP4000 for a few bucks more. Be sure to use Canon inks.
>
>
> It seems you only post here to get your daily dose of attention.
> Beyond that your experience is limited to one printer and the use of
> very overpriced OEM ink carts.
> If you have had any other experience we would certainly like to hear
> about the outcome but to keep repeating the same thing over and over
> again is extremely boring and marks you as a self-indulgent troll.
> Is that a fair description of you?
> Frank
June 14, 2005 9:17:03 PM

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

measekite wrote:

> Ah, Frankie Crankie the cockroach comes out of the woodwork.
>
> Frank wrote:
>
>> measekite wrote:
>>
>>> IP4000 for a few bucks more. Be sure to use Canon inks.
>>
>>
>>
>> It seems you only post here to get your daily dose of attention.
>> Beyond that your experience is limited to one printer and the use of
>> very overpriced OEM ink carts.
>> If you have had any other experience we would certainly like to hear
>> about the outcome but to keep repeating the same thing over and over
>> again is extremely boring and marks you as a self-indulgent troll.
>> Is that a fair description of you?
>> Frank

Give it up creep. We've all got your number.
Frank
June 14, 2005 9:33:22 PM

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

> And you are indulging it. What holds good for a toddler having a tantrum in
> the middle of a supermarket (or anywhere else for that matter) holds good
> for Usenet trolls - ignore it and it eventually shuts up. I had it killfiled
> at one point but it must have changed its address again, because it doesn't
> appear to be in the bozo bin any longer. Well, MK, consider yourself a
> *PLONK*er.

The logic that seems to be employed is a rational rebuttal that would
chalange what one might consider disputable facts which results in a
pejorative responce containing dyslogisms or other derogatory
belittling comments. While on the one hand it makes this group
undesirable to be used by anyone seeking useful formation. On the
other it makes the disputed source look far less credible and easier to
forward to the ISP for general usenet abuse.

Use of the vernacular "plonker" I doubt is lost on the audience this
side of the pond. Sir David Jason's (David John White) work has made
it over here from time to time and I have seen it's use on usenet for
years.
Anonymous
June 14, 2005 9:35:46 PM

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

Burt wrote:

>"measekite" <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote in message
>news:Slsre.719$NU5.243@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>>IP4000 for a few bucks more. Be sure to use Canon inks.
>>
>>
>
>I don't know why Measekite adds the last sentence as it is just an
>invitation for someone to tell you that there are also some good aftermarket
>cartridges and inks. He just can't leave well enough alone! If Measekite
>only gave you advice about the printer and didn't add the ink advice I
>wouldn't bother to respond. You need to know, if you were at all interested
>in inks other than Canon, that Measekite is the last person on the face of
>the earth to listen to regarding inks as he has never used aftermarket inks
>or bought from any of the aftermarket ink vendors. It appears that his
>mission in life is to deny what several of us have found out from using
>them -
>

READ ALL OF THE PROBLEMS THAT PEOPLE POST ON THIS NG. U B DA JUDGE.

>that there are some good reliable non-Canon inks available from
>selected internet vendors. He does own the IP4000 and advises everyone to
>buy that printer. On that issue he does speak from his own experience.
>
>I refill cartridges for my Canon i960 with MIS inks and some of the
>participants in this newsgroup use cartridges filled with Formulabs inks or
>refill with Formulabs inks from Alotofthings. Postings from Ron Cohen and
>Taliesyn on this Newsgroup have some information about their personal
>experience with aftermarket inks and you can also go to the following
>forum - http://www.nifty-stuff.com/forum/ for some interesting information
>about inks, printer maintenance, etc. You can also follow the link to Neil's
>ink and printer information that you will find at the top of the Nifty-stuff
>forum home page. Most of this forum is about Canon printers.
>
>
>
>
>>Jeff wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I want to buy a basic photo printer.
>>>
>>>R200 and iP3000 seem to have same price. I think R200 has five color and
>>>one black ink tanks whereas iP3000 has three color and one black tanks.
>>>
>>>Which one is better for quality of prints and trouble free operations?
>>>
>>>Thanks in advance.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
June 14, 2005 9:40:42 PM

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

Burt wrote:

>"measekite" <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote in message
>news:Slsre.719$NU5.243@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>>IP4000 for a few bucks more. Be sure to use Canon inks.
>>
>>
>
>I don't know why Measekite adds the last sentence as it is just an
>invitation for someone to tell you that there are also some good aftermarket
>cartridges and inks. He just can't leave well enough alone! If Measekite
>only gave you advice about the printer and didn't add the ink advice I
>wouldn't bother to respond. You need to know, if you were at all interested
>in inks other than Canon, that Measekite is the last person on the face of
>the earth to listen to regarding inks as he has never used aftermarket inks
>or bought from any of the aftermarket ink vendors. It appears that his
>mission in life is to deny what several of us have found out from using
>them - that there are some good reliable non-Canon inks available from
>selected internet vendors. He does own the IP4000 and advises everyone to
>buy that printer.
>

Not true. IT is generally the best but I have advised many to buy the
HP with integrated printheads in the carts if their printload is light
and very infrequents.

>On that issue he does speak from his own experience.
>
>I refill cartridges for my Canon i960 with inks and some of the
>participants in this newsgroup use cartridges filled with Formulabs inks I think. Postings from Ron Cohen and Taliesyn on this Newsgroup have some information about their personal
>experience with aftermarket inks and you can also go to the following
>forum - http://www.nifty-stuff.com/forum/ for some interesting information
>about inks, printer maintenance, etc. You can also follow the link to Neil's
>ink and printer information that you will find at the top of the Nifty-stuff
>forum home page. Most of this forum is about Canon printers.
>
>

These are all congregants and offshoots of the Church of AfterMarket
Latter Day Inks of which I am Pope Burtie Furtie the 1st.

HAIL MEASEKITE! HAIL MEASEKITE! HAIL MEASEKITE! :-D :-D :-D

>
>
>
>>Jeff wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I want to buy a basic photo printer.
>>>
>>>R200 and iP3000 seem to have same price. I think R200 has five color and
>>>one black ink tanks whereas iP3000 has three color and one black tanks.
>>>
>>>Which one is better for quality of prints and trouble free operations?
>>>
>>>Thanks in advance.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
June 15, 2005 12:11:16 AM

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

Frank wrote:

> measekite wrote:
>
>> Ah, Frankie Crankie the cockroach comes out of the woodwork.
>>
>> Frank wrote:
>>
>>> measekite wrote:
>>>
>>>> IP4000 for a few bucks more. Be sure to use Canon inks.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It seems you only post here to get your daily dose of attention.
>>> Beyond that your experience is limited to one printer and the use of
>>> very overpriced OEM ink carts.
>>> If you have had any other experience we would certainly like to hear
>>> about the outcome but to keep repeating the same thing over and over
>>> again is extremely boring and marks you as a self-indulgent troll.
>>> Is that a fair description of you?
>>> Frank
>>
>
> Give it up creep. We've all got your number.
> Frank


http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1093&e=2&u=/p...
Anonymous
June 15, 2005 3:40:46 AM

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

Frank wrote:
> measekite wrote:
>
>> IP4000 for a few bucks more. Be sure to use Canon inks.
>
> It seems you only post here to get your daily dose of attention.

And you are indulging it. What holds good for a toddler having a tantrum in
the middle of a supermarket (or anywhere else for that matter) holds good
for Usenet trolls - ignore it and it eventually shuts up. I had it killfiled
at one point but it must have changed its address again, because it doesn't
appear to be in the bozo bin any longer. Well, MK, consider yourself a
*PLONK*er.

For the American audience 'plonker' is chiefly British slang, popularised by
the character Del Boy in the long running hit sitcom /Only Fools and
Horses/. It means "an idiot or half-wit". Sums up MK rather well...
June 16, 2005 4:59:13 AM

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

> Unbelievable how childish you are. Even an idiot like you should know
> that the R200 at the same price as the ip3000 is the one to go with.
> It should be a no brainer. That means even a person without a brain,
> like you, should know the R200 is the one.

Respectfully, and the ip3000 tends to be cheaper mail order even when
you don't take canon's $20 rebate into account. Taking the rebate into
account it's almost 1/2 the price from one mail order company. In
fact, the ip3000 was cheaper this way than the OEM epson ink. That was
the main reason I picked mine up while the epson was in the shop.

In the local store they seem to be about the same.


-R200- $92.70 shipped
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?Submit=Go...
-ip3000- $66.90 shipped
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E1682...
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 1:42:59 PM

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

zakezuke wrote:
>>And you are indulging it. What holds good for a toddler having a tantrum in
>>the middle of a supermarket (or anywhere else for that matter) holds good
>>for Usenet trolls - ignore it and it eventually shuts up. I had it killfiled
>>at one point but it must have changed its address again, because it doesn't
>>appear to be in the bozo bin any longer. Well, MK, consider yourself a
>>*PLONK*er.
>
>
> The logic that seems to be employed is a rational rebuttal that would
> chalange what one might consider disputable facts which results in a
> pejorative responce containing dyslogisms or other derogatory
> belittling comments. While on the one hand it makes this group
> undesirable to be used by anyone seeking useful formation. On the
> other it makes the disputed source look far less credible and easier to
> forward to the ISP for general usenet abuse.
>
> Use of the vernacular "plonker" I doubt is lost on the audience this
> side of the pond. Sir David Jason's (David John White) work has made
> it over here from time to time and I have seen it's use on usenet for
> years.
>

X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net
X-Trace: newssvr13.news.prodigy.com 1118789649 ST000 69.232.106.26 (Tue,
14 Jun 2005 18:54:09 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 18:54:09 EDT
Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com
X-UserInfo1:
Q[R_PJSCOPTYB_@[WBHFO[P@GBY@QUDO@HTHOCULF@^PGDTFOG[]FEK[WDXJHVKHGFFIZHBL@FX\NIOC@FWYNV\DMNS[HTLIXX\^BUGBXLR@PB@\FKCLXSWAIDFOKG^MFT[GZN^NWY_GVLSRGDYY^AW_MS_RW][KBYZMADO@Y[ABPSPE_TA@LTLFXVTC@RJM
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 22:54:09 GMT
Xref: cox.net comp.periphs.printers:356086
X-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 18:55:02 EDT
June 16, 2005 8:17:26 PM

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

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 17:35:46 GMT, measekite <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote:

>
>
>Burt wrote:
>
>>"measekite" <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote in message
>>news:Slsre.719$NU5.243@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>
>>>IP4000 for a few bucks more. Be sure to use Canon inks.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I don't know why Measekite adds the last sentence as it is just an
>>invitation for someone to tell you that there are also some good aftermarket
>>cartridges and inks. He just can't leave well enough alone! If Measekite
>>only gave you advice about the printer and didn't add the ink advice I
>>wouldn't bother to respond. You need to know, if you were at all interested
>>in inks other than Canon, that Measekite is the last person on the face of
>>the earth to listen to regarding inks as he has never used aftermarket inks
>>or bought from any of the aftermarket ink vendors. It appears that his
>>mission in life is to deny what several of us have found out from using
>>them -
>>
>
>READ ALL OF THE PROBLEMS THAT PEOPLE POST ON THIS NG. U B DA JUDGE.
>
>>that there are some good reliable non-Canon inks available from
>>selected internet vendors. He does own the IP4000 and advises everyone to
>>buy that printer. On that issue he does speak from his own experience.
>>
>>I refill cartridges for my Canon i960 with MIS inks and some of the
>>participants in this newsgroup use cartridges filled with Formulabs inks or
>>refill with Formulabs inks from Alotofthings. Postings from Ron Cohen and
>>Taliesyn on this Newsgroup have some information about their personal
>>experience with aftermarket inks and you can also go to the following
>>forum - http://www.nifty-stuff.com/forum/ for some interesting information
>>about inks, printer maintenance, etc. You can also follow the link to Neil's
>>ink and printer information that you will find at the top of the Nifty-stuff
>>forum home page. Most of this forum is about Canon printers.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Jeff wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I want to buy a basic photo printer.
>>>>
>>>>R200 and iP3000 seem to have same price. I think R200 has five color and
>>>>one black ink tanks whereas iP3000 has three color and one black tanks.
>>>>
>>>>Which one is better for quality of prints and trouble free operations?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks in advance.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>



The R200 by a Mile..
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 8:17:27 PM

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

Tony wrote:

>On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 17:35:46 GMT, measekite <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Burt wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>"measekite" <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote in message
>>>news:Slsre.719$NU5.243@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>IP4000 for a few bucks more. Be sure to use Canon inks.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I don't know why Measekite adds the last sentence as it is just an
>>>invitation for someone to tell you that there are also some good aftermarket
>>>cartridges and inks. He just can't leave well enough alone! If Measekite
>>>only gave you advice about the printer and didn't add the ink advice I
>>>wouldn't bother to respond. You need to know, if you were at all interested
>>>in inks other than Canon, that Measekite is the last person on the face of
>>>the earth to listen to regarding inks as he has never used aftermarket inks
>>>or bought from any of the aftermarket ink vendors. It appears that his
>>>mission in life is to deny what several of us have found out from using
>>>them -
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>READ ALL OF THE PROBLEMS THAT PEOPLE POST ON THIS NG. U B DA JUDGE.
>>
>>
>>
>>>that there are some good reliable non-Canon inks available from
>>>selected internet vendors. He does own the IP4000 and advises everyone to
>>>buy that printer. On that issue he does speak from his own experience.
>>>
>>>I refill cartridges for my Canon i960 with MIS inks and some of the
>>>participants in this newsgroup use cartridges filled with Formulabs inks or
>>>refill with Formulabs inks from Alotofthings. Postings from Ron Cohen and
>>>Taliesyn on this Newsgroup have some information about their personal
>>>experience with aftermarket inks and you can also go to the following
>>>forum - http://www.nifty-stuff.com/forum/ for some interesting information
>>>about inks, printer maintenance, etc. You can also follow the link to Neil's
>>>ink and printer information that you will find at the top of the Nifty-stuff
>>>forum home page. Most of this forum is about Canon printers.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Jeff wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I want to buy a basic photo printer.
>>>>>
>>>>>R200 and iP3000 seem to have same price. I think R200 has five color and
>>>>>one black ink tanks whereas iP3000 has three color and one black tanks.
>>>>>
>>>>>Which one is better for quality of prints and trouble free operations?
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks in advance.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>The R200 by a Mile..
>
>

The IP3000 by 5 Miles

>
>
>
June 16, 2005 8:17:28 PM

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

measekite wrote:

> The IP3000 by 5 Miles
>
>>
>>
>>
Unbelievable how childish you are. Even an idiot like you should know
that the R200 at the same price as the ip3000 is the one to go with.
It should be a no brainer. That means even a person without a brain,
like you, should know the R200 is the one.
Frank
June 17, 2005 12:54:45 PM

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

> You are Joking..?

> Print heads tht only last 1 1/2 years and Prints that only last 5 years and
> only 3+1 Colours..

Printheads that only last 1 1/2 years? Where do you get this number
from? The service manual says 5. Prints well I don't have an estimate
on the prints but this is at least close to fair comment. Still plenty
of 3rd party solutions, but I presently don't have a resource for canon
archival ink.

I have to admit, the R200 was my first choice. But the printheads clog
very easily dispite the fact that they have a larger drop size than the
ip3000 / ip4000. Mine lasted 6 months printing on average 1 5*5 print
a day. Color output is nice, but tends to break down very easily.
The ip3000 was my choice as the epson was in the shop.

I also must agree that the ip3000 isn't exactly as spiffy as the R200.
The ip4000 is closer to a fair contest. The ip5000/ip6000 at least
are on the same level if not costing a little bit more. Rather your
choice between having the light inks and larger drop size, or smaller
drop size and the usual 3+1.
June 17, 2005 3:20:11 PM

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

> Thats funny since the IP4000 produces marginally better photos,
> substantially better business documents, is much faster than the
> IP6000. The only advantage, if you want to call it that, is to edit
> without a computer and most serious amateur photographers would not use
> that feature.

The IP6000 has no BCI-3e cart. It's clearly not designed at all for
"business" documents at all. It is a photo printer, not a general
purpose one and very much slower for text. But the IP6000 at the very
least has light inks, which are useful for filling between the dots
making the end result less grainy. But this PCless printing put it in
the same class as the epson r300/r320. Even an amateur photographers
enjoy proofsheets, and the index print feature is less clicks than
using the "photo print" software. Not to speak of cases where you need
to print from your camera but don't want to invest in a dedicated
computer. Editing without a PC, well that's fair comment. I don't
have a pictbridge camera so I can't see if index/proof sheets are
available.

But needless to say i'm considering ditching my r200 in favor of either
the ip5000 or ip6000, at present leaning tward the ip5000. I like the
r200's photo output much better but can't stand a head that's dependent
on a gasket which gets knocked out of place if you look at it funny.
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 8:03:05 PM

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

zakezuke wrote:

>>You are Joking..?
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>Print heads tht only last 1 1/2 years and Prints that only last 5 years and
>>only 3+1 Colours..
>>
>>
>
>Printheads that only last 1 1/2 years? Where do you get this number
>from? The service manual says 5.
>

Tony Da Tiger is drumming up business.

>Prints well I don't have an estimate
>on the prints but this is at least close to fair comment. Still plenty
>of 3rd party solutions, but I presently don't have a resource for canon
>archival ink.
>
>I have to admit, the R200 was my first choice. But the printheads clog
>very easily dispite the fact that they have a larger drop size than the
>ip3000 / ip4000. Mine lasted 6 months printing on average 1 5*5 print
>a day. Color output is nice, but tends to break down very easily.
>The ip3000 was my choice as the epson was in the shop.
>
>I also must agree that the ip3000 isn't exactly as spiffy as the R200.
>The ip4000 is closer to a fair contest. The ip5000/ip6000 at least
>are on the same level if not costing a little bit more.
>

Thats funny since the IP4000 produces marginally better photos,
substantially better business documents, is much faster than the
IP6000. The only advantage, if you want to call it that, is to edit
without a computer and most serious amateur photographers would not use
that feature.

>Rather your
>choice between having the light inks and larger drop size, or smaller
>drop size and the usual 3+1.
>
>
>
June 17, 2005 9:16:08 PM

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

> If you are in the US you might consider going on to the Tiger
> Direct web site to see if they still have NEW canon i960 printers available
> for about $80 after rebate.

Thanks Burt, useful as i'm in the US, but unless I can enable CD
printing on my mp760 that is a feature I require. That limits my
options. Near as i'm aware that's not an option on the i960.
Otherwise it's an excelent choice.
June 17, 2005 10:00:50 PM

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

> Right - not an option. I do print cd labels that I can apply to cd's with
> the cd stomper, but direct printing is cerainly more desireable

I have a Memorex label set. It says right on the pack "Warning: Using
a Standard for Full-Face label on DVDs may result in the disc becoming
unreadable". Used one full faced label for a Car CD player. It liked
the label so much it kept it.

I tried the spine label on a DVD. My DVD didn't like it and spat it
out.

Still others, come summer time, tended to lift off the CD-Rs, with bits
of data as well.

I have enoyed better luck attaching the full faced labels to printable
media, but for the most part I avoid them.
June 17, 2005 10:43:18 PM

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

> I would say most users that have clogging problems do not know
> how to use the printer..

I'd love to know what I did wrong, lol. Generally speaking you put
paper in and print. I've never had an issue of put paper ink ink
splash fest.

To be fair, I have to see how long the referb lasts.

> The 18 month print head thing has been reported here many times, I have been
> told here Canon only warrantee there heads for 3 months..

I'd be very interested in this, got links?

But hey, if I have to replace the printhead after 18 months i'd be
happy. Cost vs peformance ratio still is looking good to me. I have
no clue how long the warranty is on the head here.
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 11:57:42 PM

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

zakezuke wrote:

>>Thats funny since the IP4000 produces marginally better photos,
>>substantially better business documents, is much faster than the
>>IP6000. The only advantage, if you want to call it that, is to edit
>>without a computer and most serious amateur photographers would not use
>>that feature.
>>
>>
>
>The IP6000 has no BCI-3e cart. It's clearly not designed at all for
>"business" documents at all. It is a photo printer, not a general
>purpose one and very much slower for text.
>

Yeh but it still does duplex and that is not intended for photos. The
Epson R300 does not have a pigment black either but that too is used for
business documents as is the Canon i960. And the drivers still offer
plain paper.

>But the IP6000 at the very
>least has light inks, which are useful for filling between the dots
>making the end result less grainy.
>

But, unfortunately, they have a greater tendency to fade. We can hope
that Canon reformulates and improves THEIR ink.

>But this PCless printing put it in
>the same class as the epson r300/r320. Even an amateur photographers
>enjoy proofsheets, and the index print feature is less clicks than
>using the "photo print" software.
>

When you do a lot of bracketing you want to review online before you
print a proof sheet.

>Not to speak of cases where you need
>to print from your camera but don't want to invest in a dedicated
>computer.
>

The word is want not need.

>Editing without a PC, well that's fair comment. I don't
>have a pictbridge camera so I can't see if index/proof sheets are
>available.
>
>But needless to say i'm considering ditching my r200 in favor of either
>the ip5000 or ip6000, at present leaning tward the ip5000.
>

At least that is a good choice. If you do not print a lot of business
documents then the IP4000 is a better choice.

>I like the
>r200's photo output much better
>

My friend who owns and likes his R300 admits that the Canon IP4000 does
indeed produce better looking prints.

>but can't stand a head that's dependent
>on a gasket which gets knocked out of place if you look at it funny.
>
>
>
June 18, 2005 1:18:16 AM

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

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 05:01:24 GMT, measekite <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote:

>
>
>Tony wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 17:35:46 GMT, measekite <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Burt wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>"measekite" <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:Slsre.719$NU5.243@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>IP4000 for a few bucks more. Be sure to use Canon inks.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>I don't know why Measekite adds the last sentence as it is just an
>>>>invitation for someone to tell you that there are also some good aftermarket
>>>>cartridges and inks. He just can't leave well enough alone! If Measekite
>>>>only gave you advice about the printer and didn't add the ink advice I
>>>>wouldn't bother to respond. You need to know, if you were at all interested
>>>>in inks other than Canon, that Measekite is the last person on the face of
>>>>the earth to listen to regarding inks as he has never used aftermarket inks
>>>>or bought from any of the aftermarket ink vendors. It appears that his
>>>>mission in life is to deny what several of us have found out from using
>>>>them -
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>READ ALL OF THE PROBLEMS THAT PEOPLE POST ON THIS NG. U B DA JUDGE.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>that there are some good reliable non-Canon inks available from
>>>>selected internet vendors. He does own the IP4000 and advises everyone to
>>>>buy that printer. On that issue he does speak from his own experience.
>>>>
>>>>I refill cartridges for my Canon i960 with MIS inks and some of the
>>>>participants in this newsgroup use cartridges filled with Formulabs inks or
>>>>refill with Formulabs inks from Alotofthings. Postings from Ron Cohen and
>>>>Taliesyn on this Newsgroup have some information about their personal
>>>>experience with aftermarket inks and you can also go to the following
>>>>forum - http://www.nifty-stuff.com/forum/ for some interesting information
>>>>about inks, printer maintenance, etc. You can also follow the link to Neil's
>>>>ink and printer information that you will find at the top of the Nifty-stuff
>>>>forum home page. Most of this forum is about Canon printers.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Jeff wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I want to buy a basic photo printer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>R200 and iP3000 seem to have same price. I think R200 has five color and
>>>>>>one black ink tanks whereas iP3000 has three color and one black tanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Which one is better for quality of prints and trouble free operations?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks in advance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>The R200 by a Mile..
>>
>>
>
>The IP3000 by 5 Miles
>
>>
>>
>>



You are Joking..?

Print heads tht only last 1 1/2 years and Prints that only last 5 years and
only 3+1 Colours..
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 1:18:17 AM

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

Tony wrote:

>On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 05:01:24 GMT, measekite <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Tony wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 17:35:46 GMT, measekite <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Burt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"measekite" <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:Slsre.719$NU5.243@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>IP4000 for a few bucks more. Be sure to use Canon inks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>I don't know why Measekite adds the last sentence as it is just an
>>>>>invitation for someone to tell you that there are also some good aftermarket
>>>>>cartridges and inks. He just can't leave well enough alone! If Measekite
>>>>>only gave you advice about the printer and didn't add the ink advice I
>>>>>wouldn't bother to respond. You need to know, if you were at all interested
>>>>>in inks other than Canon, that Measekite is the last person on the face of
>>>>>the earth to listen to regarding inks as he has never used aftermarket inks
>>>>>or bought from any of the aftermarket ink vendors. It appears that his
>>>>>mission in life is to deny what several of us have found out from using
>>>>>them -
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>READ ALL OF THE PROBLEMS THAT PEOPLE POST ON THIS NG. U B DA JUDGE.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>that there are some good reliable non-Canon inks available from
>>>>>selected internet vendors. He does own the IP4000 and advises everyone to
>>>>>buy that printer. On that issue he does speak from his own experience.
>>>>>
>>>>>I refill cartridges for my Canon i960 with MIS inks and some of the
>>>>>participants in this newsgroup use cartridges filled with Formulabs inks or
>>>>>refill with Formulabs inks from Alotofthings. Postings from Ron Cohen and
>>>>>Taliesyn on this Newsgroup have some information about their personal
>>>>>experience with aftermarket inks and you can also go to the following
>>>>>forum - http://www.nifty-stuff.com/forum/ for some interesting information
>>>>>about inks, printer maintenance, etc. You can also follow the link to Neil's
>>>>>ink and printer information that you will find at the top of the Nifty-stuff
>>>>>forum home page. Most of this forum is about Canon printers.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Jeff wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I want to buy a basic photo printer.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>R200 and iP3000 seem to have same price. I think R200 has five color and
>>>>>>>one black ink tanks whereas iP3000 has three color and one black tanks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Which one is better for quality of prints and trouble free operations?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Thanks in advance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>The R200 by a Mile..
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>The IP3000 by 5 Miles
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>You are Joking..?
>
>Print heads tht only last 1 1/2 years and Prints that only last 5 years and
>only 3+1 Colours..
>
>

That is Bullshit. The new line of Canon Printers and even the one
before it has not been out for 5 years. And everyone who has an i860
did not replace the printhead. Is Tony Da Tiger drumming up business?

>
>
>
June 18, 2005 1:18:18 AM

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

Give me strength - different Tony - I thought you had managed to learn to read
short words but obviously I was wrong.
Tony


measekite <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote:
>Tony wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 05:01:24 GMT, measekite <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Tony wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 17:35:46 GMT, measekite <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Burt wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>"measekite" <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:Slsre.719$NU5.243@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>IP4000 for a few bucks more. Be sure to use Canon inks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>I don't know why Measekite adds the last sentence as it is just an
>>>>>>invitation for someone to tell you that there are also some good
>>>>>>aftermarket
>>>>>>cartridges and inks. He just can't leave well enough alone! If Measekite
>>>>>>only gave you advice about the printer and didn't add the ink advice I
>>>>>>wouldn't bother to respond. You need to know, if you were at all
>>>>>>interested
>>>>>>in inks other than Canon, that Measekite is the last person on the face
>>>>>>of
>>>>>>the earth to listen to regarding inks as he has never used aftermarket
>>>>>>inks
>>>>>>or bought from any of the aftermarket ink vendors. It appears that his
>>>>>>mission in life is to deny what several of us have found out from using
>>>>>>them -
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>READ ALL OF THE PROBLEMS THAT PEOPLE POST ON THIS NG. U B DA JUDGE.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>that there are some good reliable non-Canon inks available from
>>>>>>selected internet vendors. He does own the IP4000 and advises everyone
>>>>>>to
>>>>>>buy that printer. On that issue he does speak from his own experience.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I refill cartridges for my Canon i960 with MIS inks and some of the
>>>>>>participants in this newsgroup use cartridges filled with Formulabs inks
>>>>>>or
>>>>>>refill with Formulabs inks from Alotofthings. Postings from Ron Cohen
>>>>>>and
>>>>>>Taliesyn on this Newsgroup have some information about their personal
>>>>>>experience with aftermarket inks and you can also go to the following
>>>>>>forum - http://www.nifty-stuff.com/forum/ for some interesting
>>>>>>information
>>>>>>about inks, printer maintenance, etc. You can also follow the link to
>>>>>>Neil's
>>>>>>ink and printer information that you will find at the top of the
>>>>>>Nifty-stuff
>>>>>>forum home page. Most of this forum is about Canon printers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Jeff wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I want to buy a basic photo printer.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>R200 and iP3000 seem to have same price. I think R200 has five color
>>>>>>>>and
>>>>>>>>one black ink tanks whereas iP3000 has three color and one black tanks.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Which one is better for quality of prints and trouble free operations?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Thanks in advance.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>The R200 by a Mile..
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>The IP3000 by 5 Miles
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>You are Joking..?
>>
>>Print heads tht only last 1 1/2 years and Prints that only last 5 years and
>>only 3+1 Colours..
>>
>>
>
>That is Bullshit. The new line of Canon Printers and even the one
>before it has not been out for 5 years. And everyone who has an i860
>did not replace the printhead. Is Tony Da Tiger drumming up business?
>
>>
>>
>>
June 18, 2005 3:27:25 AM

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

Zakazuke - If you are in the US you might consider going on to the Tiger
Direct web site to see if they still have NEW canon i960 printers available
for about $80 after rebate. They have refurbs available for $10 less, but I
would be leary of them, especially if you can buy a new one for $10 more.
After shipping and getting the rebate you will have spent a little over $100
for an excellent six color photo printer. Text is very decent as well, but
I have only used mine for photos and graphics. No duplex (don't need it)
and no cassette paper tray (don't need that either) It does have a
"piggy-back" device that will keep 4x6 photo paper loaded while you have
letter size paper on the feed deck, but I don't find that a great benefit
either. Keep it simple is my approach.

"zakezuke" <zakezuke_us@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1119032411.402180.129790@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> Thats funny since the IP4000 produces marginally better photos,
>> substantially better business documents, is much faster than the
>> IP6000. The only advantage, if you want to call it that, is to edit
>> without a computer and most serious amateur photographers would not use
>> that feature.
>
> The IP6000 has no BCI-3e cart. It's clearly not designed at all for
> "business" documents at all. It is a photo printer, not a general
> purpose one and very much slower for text. But the IP6000 at the very
> least has light inks, which are useful for filling between the dots
> making the end result less grainy. But this PCless printing put it in
> the same class as the epson r300/r320. Even an amateur photographers
> enjoy proofsheets, and the index print feature is less clicks than
> using the "photo print" software. Not to speak of cases where you need
> to print from your camera but don't want to invest in a dedicated
> computer. Editing without a PC, well that's fair comment. I don't
> have a pictbridge camera so I can't see if index/proof sheets are
> available.
>
> But needless to say i'm considering ditching my r200 in favor of either
> the ip5000 or ip6000, at present leaning tward the ip5000. I like the
> r200's photo output much better but can't stand a head that's dependent
> on a gasket which gets knocked out of place if you look at it funny.
>
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 4:10:29 AM

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

Burt wrote:

>Zakazuke - If you are in the US you might consider going on to the Tiger
>Direct web site to see if they still have NEW canon i960 printers available
>for about $80 after rebate.
>

That is not Tony Da Tiger.

>They have refurbs available for $10 less,
>

Big Deal

>but I
>would be leary of them, especially if you can buy a new one for $10 more.
>

You should be leary of AfterMarket ink vendors who do not tell you what
they are selling.

>
>After shipping and getting the rebate you will have spent a little over $100
>for an excellent six color photo printer.
>

And for the same money you can get an up to date full featured IP4000.
I doubt that you could tell the difference and there are no light load
dye inks that have a tendancy to fade.

>Text is very decent as well, but
>I have only used mine for photos and graphics. No duplex (don't need it)
>and no cassette paper tray (don't need that either) It does have a
>"piggy-back" device that will keep 4x6 photo paper loaded while you have
>letter size paper on the feed deck, but I don't find that a great benefit
>either. Keep it simple is my approach.
>
>"zakezuke" <zakezuke_us@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:1119032411.402180.129790@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>>>Thats funny since the IP4000 produces marginally better photos,
>>>substantially better business documents, is much faster than the
>>>IP6000. The only advantage, if you want to call it that, is to edit
>>>without a computer and most serious amateur photographers would not use
>>>that feature.
>>>
>>>
>>The IP6000 has no BCI-3e cart. It's clearly not designed at all for
>>"business" documents at all. It is a photo printer, not a general
>>purpose one and very much slower for text. But the IP6000 at the very
>>least has light inks, which are useful for filling between the dots
>>making the end result less grainy. But this PCless printing put it in
>>the same class as the epson r300/r320. Even an amateur photographers
>>enjoy proofsheets, and the index print feature is less clicks than
>>using the "photo print" software. Not to speak of cases where you need
>>to print from your camera but don't want to invest in a dedicated
>>computer. Editing without a PC, well that's fair comment. I don't
>>have a pictbridge camera so I can't see if index/proof sheets are
>>available.
>>
>>But needless to say i'm considering ditching my r200 in favor of either
>>the ip5000 or ip6000, at present leaning tward the ip5000. I like the
>>r200's photo output much better but can't stand a head that's dependent
>>on a gasket which gets knocked out of place if you look at it funny.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
June 18, 2005 4:38:59 AM

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

"measekite" <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote in message
news:VDJse.3634$NU5.2997@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> Burt wrote:
>
>>Zakazuke - If you are in the US you might consider going on to the Tiger
>>Direct web site to see if they still have NEW canon i960 printers
>>available for about $80 after rebate.
>
> That is not Tony Da Tiger.
>
>>They have refurbs available for $10 less,
>
> Big Deal
>
>>but I would be leary of them, especially if you can buy a new one for $10
>>more.
>>
>
> You should be leary of AfterMarket ink vendors who do not tell you what
> they are selling.
>
>> After shipping and getting the rebate you will have spent a little over
>> $100 for an excellent six color photo printer.
>
> And for the same money you can get an up to date full featured IP4000. I
> doubt that you could tell the difference and there are no light load dye
> inks that have a tendancy to fade.
>
Back to the original post - looking for the best quality print (photo print,
I presume.) No need for dual paper feed or duplexing as neither of these is
useful for dedicated photo printers. The six color printers do tend to
print closer to the appearance of continuous tones in areas like the sky.
No need for the pigmented cart that is used solely for text with plain
paper. So, what is the big deal with "full featured" for someone who wants
a photo printer? Except for the 1 picoliter model and the addition of
printers with red and green inks the rest of the Pixma line is basically
repackaged I series printers with the addition of the duplexing and paper
feed feature. The IP4000 print head is the same as its predecessor in the I
series. Same ink carts. The 1 picoliter and eight ink color models may be
considered "up to date" or new technology, but hardly the IP4000. Get
real. For those who want a multipurpose printer with duplexing capability
it would be desireable, but the duplexing is so slow that it competes,
speedwise, with the proverbial boredom of "watching the grass grow." The
i960 is a great deal for someone who wants an inexpensive dedicated photo
printer as long as archival quality prints are not the primary requirement.
If it is, all the canon line, with dye based inks, should be avoided.

(snip)
June 18, 2005 4:42:05 AM

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

Right - not an option. I do print cd labels that I can apply to cd's with
the cd stomper, but direct printing is cerainly more desireable.

"zakezuke" <zakezuke_us@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1119053768.808676.268660@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> If you are in the US you might consider going on to the Tiger
>> Direct web site to see if they still have NEW canon i960 printers
>> available
>> for about $80 after rebate.
>
> Thanks Burt, useful as i'm in the US, but unless I can enable CD
> printing on my mp760 that is a feature I require. That limits my
> options. Near as i'm aware that's not an option on the i960.
> Otherwise it's an excelent choice.
>
June 18, 2005 5:27:57 PM

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

On 17 Jun 2005 08:54:45 -0700, "zakezuke" <zakezuke_us@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> You are Joking..?
>
>> Print heads tht only last 1 1/2 years and Prints that only last 5 years and
>> only 3+1 Colours..
>
>Printheads that only last 1 1/2 years? Where do you get this number
>from? The service manual says 5. Prints well I don't have an estimate
>on the prints but this is at least close to fair comment. Still plenty
>of 3rd party solutions, but I presently don't have a resource for canon
>archival ink.
>
>I have to admit, the R200 was my first choice. But the printheads clog
>very easily dispite the fact that they have a larger drop size than the
>ip3000 / ip4000. Mine lasted 6 months printing on average 1 5*5 print
>a day. Color output is nice, but tends to break down very easily.
>The ip3000 was my choice as the epson was in the shop.
>
>I also must agree that the ip3000 isn't exactly as spiffy as the R200.
>The ip4000 is closer to a fair contest. The ip5000/ip6000 at least
>are on the same level if not costing a little bit more. Rather your
>choice between having the light inks and larger drop size, or smaller
>drop size and the usual 3+1.



I have a R210 the OZZY version of the R200 no clogging at all, I would say
most users that have clogging problems do not know how to use the printer..

The 18 month print head thing has been reported here many times, I have been
told here Canon only warrantee there heads for 3 months..
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 5:27:58 PM

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

Tony wrote:

>On 17 Jun 2005 08:54:45 -0700, "zakezuke" <zakezuke_us@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>>You are Joking..?
>>>
>>>
>>>Print heads tht only last 1 1/2 years and Prints that only last 5 years and
>>>only 3+1 Colours..
>>>
>>>
>>Printheads that only last 1 1/2 years? Where do you get this number
>>from? The service manual says 5. Prints well I don't have an estimate
>>on the prints but this is at least close to fair comment. Still plenty
>>of 3rd party solutions, but I presently don't have a resource for canon
>>archival ink.
>>
>>I have to admit, the R200 was my first choice. But the printheads clog
>>very easily dispite the fact that they have a larger drop size than the
>>ip3000 / ip4000. Mine lasted 6 months printing on average 1 5*5 print
>>a day. Color output is nice, but tends to break down very easily.
>>The ip3000 was my choice as the epson was in the shop.
>>
>>I also must agree that the ip3000 isn't exactly as spiffy as the R200.
>>The ip4000 is closer to a fair contest. The ip5000/ip6000 at least
>>are on the same level if not costing a little bit more. Rather your
>>choice between having the light inks and larger drop size, or smaller
>>drop size and the usual 3+1.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>I have a R210 the OZZY version of the R200 no clogging at all, I would say
>most users that have clogging problems do not know how to use the printer..
>
>

You are probably right if they use 3rd party ink.

>The 18 month print head thing has been reported here many times, I have been
>told here Canon only warrantee there heads for 3 months..
>
>
>
>
June 18, 2005 6:48:19 PM

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

> Because you never know. It sure saves space when you file papers you
> print. It is also better for the environment.

I'm all for the environment, but the point is if you have a dedicated
photo printer and are using single sided paper for the soul purpose of
creating pictures for display the feature is pointless.

Now if you have a general purpose printer, the feature *somewhat*
useful, but people like my self an others find it faster to print odd
and even copys and just re-insert the paper.

But anyone interested in the environment who's goal is to reduce waste
should consider a laser.
June 18, 2005 9:31:03 PM

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

zakezuke wrote:
>>Because you never know. It sure saves space when you file papers you
>>print. It is also better for the environment.
>
>
> I'm all for the environment, but the point is if you have a dedicated
> photo printer and are using single sided paper for the soul purpose of
> creating pictures for display the feature is pointless.
>
> Now if you have a general purpose printer, the feature *somewhat*
> useful, but people like my self an others find it faster to print odd
> and even copys and just re-insert the paper.
>
> But anyone interested in the environment who's goal is to reduce waste
> should consider a laser.
>

Yeah there's nothing like destroying your printer and wasting your time
by using mechanical duplex.
I print a lot of double sided business docs and use only software based
duplex printing.
Frank
June 19, 2005 12:45:07 AM

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

> anyone who is REALLY interested in the environment and uses an
> inkjet printer would do anything possible to stop throwing away single-use
> inkjet cartridges.

Agreed. I know inksupply very well just not on the canon yet. More
ecopoints that way. Haven't had a chance to see the results from other
suppliers. While paper is more renewable than plastic, its not
reached the point that tree farms are self sufficent enough to produce
all the paper we need. Speaking in terms of volumes of waste... paper
is worse. But speaking in terms of the ecosystem, I can only image
what waste plastic still with a few ml of ink are doing.

But either way less chemistry required than photography.
June 19, 2005 4:10:13 AM

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

> I have been told that MIS ink is Image Specialist ink.

If that's the case I believe the IS numbers would be (according to a
little bird)

WJ1010 Black pigment
WJ2032 Cyan
WJ6053 magenta
WJ797 Yellow
WJ2043 Light Cyan
WJ6061 Light Magenta
WJ1008 Black

---Archival---

WJ1019 Black pigment
WJ293 Cyan
WJ690 magenta
WJ759 Yellow
WJ2003 Light Cyan
WJ6003 Light Magenta
??????? black
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 5:09:03 AM

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

Frank wrote:

> zakezuke wrote:
>
>>> Because you never know. It sure saves space when you file papers you
>>> print. It is also better for the environment.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm all for the environment, but the point is if you have a dedicated
>> photo printer and are using single sided paper for the soul purpose of
>> creating pictures for display the feature is pointless.
>>
>> Now if you have a general purpose printer, the feature *somewhat*
>> useful, but people like my self an others find it faster to print odd
>> and even copys and just re-insert the paper.
>>
>> But anyone interested in the environment who's goal is to reduce waste
>> should consider a laser.
>>
>
> Yeah there's nothing like your time by using software based duplex
> printing.
> I print a lot of double sided business docs and use only mechanical
> duplex.
> Frank


Me Too =-O
June 19, 2005 5:09:04 AM

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

measekite wrote:

>
> Me Too =-O

You too what?
Frank
June 19, 2005 6:56:56 AM

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

"zakezuke" <zakezuke_us@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1119131299.140671.177060@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> Because you never know. It sure saves space when you file papers you
>> print. It is also better for the environment.
>
> I'm all for the environment, but the point is if you have a dedicated
> photo printer and are using single sided paper for the soul purpose of
> creating pictures for display the feature is pointless.
>
> Now if you have a general purpose printer, the feature *somewhat*
> useful, but people like my self an others find it faster to print odd
> and even copys and just re-insert the paper.
>
> But anyone interested in the environment who's goal is to reduce waste
> should consider a laser.

Zake - anyone who is REALLY interested in the environment and uses an
inkjet printer would do anything possible to stop throwing away single-use
inkjet cartridges. I am using the same set of OEM carts that came with my
Canon i960 printer after refilling them for the better part of a year. I
just retired one of them after 10 refills and replaced it with an empty
cartridge that is designed for refilling - refilled with MIS inks. As far
as costs are concerned, a ream of plain copy paper costs $2 to $4 and an OEM
cart costs $9 (costco) to $12 retail. I can print a lot of single sided
documents before I get up to the cost of throwing away a pefectly good OEM
refillable cartridge.
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 10:04:57 AM

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

Burt wrote:

>"zakezuke" <zakezuke_us@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:1119131299.140671.177060@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>>>Because you never know. It sure saves space when you file papers you
>>>print. It is also better for the environment.
>>>
>>>
>>I'm all for the environment, but the point is if you have a dedicated
>>photo printer and are using single sided paper for the soul purpose of
>>creating pictures for display the feature is pointless.
>>
>>Now if you have a general purpose printer, the feature *somewhat*
>>useful, but people like my self an others find it faster to print odd
>>and even copys and just re-insert the paper.
>>
>>But anyone interested in the environment who's goal is to reduce waste
>>should consider a laser.
>>
>>
>
>Zake - anyone who is REALLY interested in the environment and uses an
>inkjet printer would do anything possible to stop throwing away single-use
>inkjet cartridges. I am using the same set of OEM carts that came with my
>Canon i960 printer after refilling them for the better part of a year. I
>just retired one of them after 10 refills and replaced it with an empty
>cartridge that is designed for refilling - refilled with MIS inks.
>

MIS is a vendor label for an UNBRANDED GENERIC INK. HE IS THE ONLY ONE
ON THIS NG THAT I READ THAT IS USING THIS LABEL IN AN I960 PRINTER.

>As far
>as costs are concerned, a ream of plain copy paper costs $2 to $4 and an OEM
>cart costs $9 (costco)
>
NOT

> to $12 retail. I can print a lot of single sided
>documents before I get up to the cost of throwing away a pefectly good OEM
>refillable cartridge.
>
>
>
>
June 19, 2005 10:39:31 AM

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

"measekite" <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote in message
news:D W7te.4460$NU5.2325@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> Burt wrote:
>
>>Zake - anyone who is REALLY interested in the environment and uses an
>>inkjet printer would do anything possible to stop throwing away single-use
>>inkjet cartridges. I am using the same set of OEM carts that came with my
>>Canon i960 printer after refilling them for the better part of a year. I
>>just retired one of them after 10 refills and replaced it with an empty
>>cartridge that is designed for refilling - refilled with MIS inks.
>
> Measekite wrote: MIS is a vendor label for an UNBRANDED GENERIC INK. HE
> IS THE ONLY ONE ON THIS NG THAT I READ THAT IS USING THIS LABEL IN AN I960
> PRINTER.

I have been told that MIS ink is Image Specialist ink. Frankly, I don't
care who makes it as it is excellent quality, extremely close color match to
OEM, and no clogs in nearly a year. Anyone who is interested in more
information can go to Neil Slade's web site and read all of his information
which is primarily about Canon printers, inks, cartridges, and printer
maintenance. Good background information for anyone with a Canon printer.
http://www.neilslade.com/papers/inkjetstuff.html
>
>>As far as costs are concerned, a ream of plain copy paper costs $2 to $4
>>and an OEM cart costs $9 (costco)

Refilling cost is about $1 per cartridge and takes about 5 to 10 minutes
when you get it organized. My first set of 2 oz. bottles (six colors) of
bulk ink saved me enough money to buy two printers if/when this one fails.
I am now on my second set of 2 oz containers. Still no problems with clogs,
color match, or printer malfunction. It is a no brainer. AND you don't
have to throw away a perfectly good OEM empty cart after one use. Good for
the planet and good for my wallet.
>>
> NOT

?????
>
>> to $12 retail. I can print a lot of single sided documents before I get
>> up to the cost of throwing away a pefectly good OEM refillable cartridge.
>>
>>
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 11:35:27 AM

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

Burt wrote:

>"measekite" <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote in message
>news:D W7te.4460$NU5.2325@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>>Burt wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Zake - anyone who is REALLY interested in the environment and uses an
>>>inkjet printer would do anything possible to stop throwing away single-use
>>>inkjet cartridges. I am using the same set of OEM carts that came with my
>>>Canon i960 printer after refilling them for the better part of a year. I
>>>just retired one of them after 10 refills and replaced it with an empty
>>>cartridge that is designed for refilling - refilled with MIS inks.
>>>
>>>
>> Measekite wrote: MIS is a vendor label for an UNBRANDED GENERIC INK. HE
>>IS THE ONLY ONE ON THIS NG THAT I READ THAT IS USING THIS LABEL IN AN I960
>>PRINTER.
>>
>>
>
>I have been told that MIS ink is Image Specialist ink.
>

WHO TOLD YOU. WAS IT INKSUPPLY. IF SO WHY IS THAT NOT ON THEIR WEBSITE.

>Frankly, I don't
>care who makes it as it is excellent quality, extremely close color match to
>OEM, and no clogs in nearly a year.
>

You are only 1 person.

>Anyone who is interested in more
>information can go to Neil Slade's church site and read all of his information
>which is primarily about Canon printers, inks, cartridges, and printer
>maintenance. Good background information for anyone with a Canon printer.
>http://www.neilslade.com/papers/inkjetstuff.html
>
>
>>>As far as costs are concerned, a ream of plain copy paper costs $2 to $4
>>>and an OEM cart costs $9 (costco)
>>>
>>>
>
>Refilling cost is about $1 per cartridge and takes about 5 to 10 minutes
>when you get it organized. My first set of 2 oz. bottles (six colors) of
>bulk ink saved me enough money to buy two printers if/when this one fails.
>I am now on my second set of 2 oz containers. Still no problems with clogs,
>color match, or printer malfunction. It is a no brainer.
>

and you do not have one.

>AND you don't
>have to throw away a perfectly good OEM empty cart after one use.
>

They are not good. They are empty.

>Good for
>the planet and good for my wallet.
>
>
>>NOT
>>
>>
>
>?????
>
>
>>>to $12 retail. I can print a lot of single sided documents before I get
>>>up to the cost of throwing away a pefectly good OEM refillable cartridge.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 11:35:45 AM

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

Burt wrote:

>"measekite" <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote in message
>news:D W7te.4460$NU5.2325@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>>Burt wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Zake - anyone who is REALLY interested in the environment and uses an
>>>inkjet printer would do anything possible to stop throwing away single-use
>>>inkjet cartridges. I am using the same set of OEM carts that came with my
>>>Canon i960 printer after refilling them for the better part of a year. I
>>>just retired one of them after 10 refills and replaced it with an empty
>>>cartridge that is designed for refilling - refilled with MIS inks.
>>>
>>>
>> Measekite wrote: MIS is a vendor label for an UNBRANDED GENERIC INK. HE
>>IS THE ONLY ONE ON THIS NG THAT I READ THAT IS USING THIS LABEL IN AN I960
>>PRINTER.
>>
>>
>
>I have been told that MIS ink is Image Specialist ink.
>

WHO TOLD YOU. WAS IT INKSUPPLY. IF SO WHY IS THAT NOT ON THEIR WEBSITE.

>Frankly, I don't
>care who makes it as it is excellent quality, extremely close color match to
>OEM, and no clogs in nearly a year.
>

You are only 1 person.

>Anyone who is interested in more
>information can go to Neil Slade's church site and read all of his information
>which is primarily about Canon printers, inks, cartridges, and printer
>maintenance. Good background information for anyone with a Canon printer.
>http://www.neilslade.com/papers/inkjetstuff.html
>
>
>>>As far as costs are concerned, a ream of plain copy paper costs $2 to $4
>>>and an OEM cart costs $9 (costco)
>>>
>>>
>
>Refilling cost is about $1 per cartridge and takes about 5 to 10 minutes
>when you get it organized. My first set of 2 oz. bottles (six colors) of
>bulk ink saved me enough money to buy two printers if/when this one fails.
>I am now on my second set of 2 oz containers. Still no problems with clogs,
>color match, or printer malfunction. It is a no brainer.
>

and you do not have one.

>AND you don't
>have to throw away a perfectly good OEM empty cart after one use.
>

They are not good. They are empty.

>Good for
>the planet and good for my wallet.
>
>
>>NOT
>>
>>
>
>?????
>
>
>>>to $12 retail. I can print a lot of single sided documents before I get
>>>up to the cost of throwing away a pefectly good OEM refillable cartridge.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
June 19, 2005 1:02:55 PM

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

measekite wrote:
>
> You are only 1 person.
>
And how many does that make you, you idiot.
Frank
June 19, 2005 1:04:08 PM

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

measekite wrote:


>
>
> They are not good. They are empty.

I see that you really are that stupid.
Amazing!
Frank
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 11:00:12 PM

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

Frank wrote:

> measekite wrote:
>
>>
>> You are only 1 person.
>>
> And how many does that make me an idiot.
> Frank
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 11:00:48 PM

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

Frank wrote:

> measekite wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>> They are not good. They are empty.
>
>
> I see that you really I am really that stupid.
> Amazing!
> Frank
!