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.
>
>
>