If anyone wants to pre-order from B&H in the US, I have an affiliate link which helps fund the channel bhpho.to/4dJkpmL I also have a 'tips jar' at Ko-fi if you'd like to support my testing work ko-fi.com/keithcooper
Note to anyone wanting to pre-order. When you place your pre-order with B&H, your credit card will be charge immediately. If this is a problem, or if you have a working 17" printer now, you may wish to wait until the printers are actually shipping. My Epson 3880 is dead, so it's worth it to me to get a new printer asap, and if paying now gets me a printer sooner, then OK. Otherwise, $1,400 now for a printer later, might not be the best use or one's funds. Just saying...
Several times over the last few months I have had the Pro 1000 in my cart to purchase but never did. The main reason was the age of 8 years, I figured a refresh had to be coming out which likely meant new inks. I am glad I waited. Thanks for sharing!
Yes, I strongly suspected it was coming, at the beginning of the year, when they announced the new inks for the 2600 - looking forward to actually trying it out!
Many years ago I owned a Pixma Pro 9000 printer that used 8 tiny ink cartridges that were at the time pretty expensive to replace at ~$140. Looking at the current batch of Canon printers I'm seeing inksets that are an eyewatering $700 USD. I actually thew away the Pixma away rather than buy another set of ink. It was like there was a cost analysis that had to go in before I'd make a print. Today I'm using an Epson ET-8550 and couldn't be happier. The images that come out of it amaze me with every print, the inkjet consists of 5 different colors, and ~$130-ish gets you 5 huge bottles of ink to refill it. It lasts forever, and gives me the freedom to print whatever and whenever I want without the cost analysis. $700 for an inkset seems to be insanity.
6 months ago my 7 year old Pro-1000 died, however Canon replaced it at no cost. At the time I cynically thought, they must be getting ready to introduce a new printer and are purging their stock of 1000s. Well, here we are. Looking forward to seeing your review on the 1100. Don't think I'll change right away, though, unless the inks are significantly different. Thanks for the update, Keith.
NO WAY!!!! I have been waiting for for this to come out for nearly 5 years. Can't wait for the full review and write-up. Cost of ink relative to prints, cleaning cycle use, and black & white, blue, and red performance compared to the others like the PR0-1000, PRO-200 (my current printer), and maybe some of Epson's product would be of interest to me. It looks like it will be going for only $1,299 in the United States. Great work Keith!
This is great news, thank you Keith for the update. Finally I can make a decision between the 1100 and 2600. It's probably going to come down to how well the 1100 handles the long sheets of paper. Looking forward to your detailed reviews on these 2 printers.
I print maybe 3 large prints per month. Just bought the 1000 five months ago. I don’t see a compelling reason to drain the ink, box it up and sell it for half of what I paid for a few minor updates. Thanks for updating us with this video.
I'm curious to know if the "wax" added to the new inks will make head clogs and cleaning cycles more of a problem. Especially for folks who use the printer weekly but not every day.
@KeithCooper Considering that it's priced the same as the 1000, it's an easy choice. Unless it has a big flaw or one gets a good deal on the 1000 in sale.
Splendid - a rather more crowded spot than then - buildings completed over the other side of the road. You'll see the area in quite a few of my lens reviews too
@@KeithCooper I remember there being an earthquake too when staying in the Premier Inn around that time. Is the new Canon Pro-1100 any faster at printing than the Pro-1000 as I still find it pain but worth the wait!
@@SimonWestPhotography I doubt there is any significant change in print speed. I missed the quake, being at the pub that night - Karen however was at home and noticed the floors bouncing :-)
This may come off as too amateur of a question, but would this printer be a proper one to get for exclusively black and white printing? Or are there printers that do black and white more properly with more gradations of inks to cover a larger range for proper black and white images?
A very reasonable question - I tested B&W quite extensively when I reviewed the PRO-1000, and it did well. This will be a key part of my testing to come
Good morning Keith. First of all: one of the main problems with the pro1000 was ink consumption, because you have to print every one or two days otherwise the printing automatically starts a cleaning session. Could you test if the print management is the same for the new one? Second: I am a happy owner of an Epson P900 printer. Could you compare the two printers, explain the differences and suggest whether buying a new Canon is an upgrade from the Epson P900? Thank you Keith for all you do for us print enthusiasts.
There is no difference, as far as I know at the moment, in the cleaning side of the 1000 and 1100. Obviously I'll look at this when one is here. As to a 900/1100 comparison - that will be tricky, but I'll give it some thought
From what I've read, the cleaning cycles happen even if you print, however they stay at the smaller level rather than rocketing up through the levels. Excessive cleaning is part of the reason I went for Epson. I can accept there is sometimes a need to clean, but surely not every so many hours regardless of operating conditions.
@@jameswalker7874 Absolutely true! I am so tired of continually buying maintenance carts just to keep it running! If they fixed that I would definitely upgrade in the near future!
I’d always assumed the Epson 900 was much smaller just because it was newer tech, so I expected any pro 1000 replacement to similarly reduce the footprint - but this seems to be the exact same exterior as the 1000 with some internal / ink changes. What is it that makes the Canon printers so much larger / allows Epson to be much smaller?
Design parameters and targeted market segment... The 900 is aimed at a market which values compactness and cares about weight. Purely product marketing strategies ;-)
Thanks Keith. One more question - with there being no roll support, how exactly would you print something 10ft long (or even 3ft long)? Is it just a case of using a roll but having to hold the paper up behind the feeder? That sounds very impractical if so. Looking forward to your 10ft print!
I'd like to see included in the test it's resistance to ink dumps if moved or tilted when moved as this was a problem that put me off the 1000 reported in forums. Also a similarly reported problem of ink flushing when a cartridge is replaced with either it's line or all lines generating a cascade effect, thinking of it's robustness if placed on a rolling support or if it needs shifting in an office situation when trying out panamara prints.
Something I'll test if only I get enough spare ink from Canon, along with a spare maintenance cart... Printers like this do not generally like movement of what they are sitting on - but pano work will need care in siting the printer
okay need to know if there max paper size you can use in this printer. also fact i only print ever so often. and when college ends in second week of may i do not print again in till middle of aug. will still be good for me. also from 2 week of nov to first week of jan i do not print. also might be weeks where do not need print for college season too. why looking at pro-1000. also want to print 13x19 can i print on pro-300 too
Thanks Keith, nice to see a really early summary and looking forward to your in-depth review next month. Question: will the Pro-1000 continue to be supported (inks etc...) for the foreseeable?
Good video 👍🏼 One thing that crossed my mind was, is it possible to run the ”old” inq in the new printer? I’m thinking that the old printer did awesome prints so the old inq are going to be cheaper and probably ”good enogh” for a person like me. The other way arround you did answer in the video. Keep up the good work and i almost can’t wait until the review 🙏🏻
Thank - My feeling is that the old ink carts 'won't work' in the new one. That and the differences would show in print quality [the blacks for example]
I am curious would you see a difference of an image that is printed with a 12 ink pigment base inkjet printer, the Canon TC-20 and a pixma iP8720 on the same media. lets assume it to be lustre paper. if there is a difference how much difference would there be.
Would _I_ see the differences between the three, using custom icc profiles and a standard test image... Putting them next to each other. Yes, because I test printers/papers. How many others would see the differences if it wan't pointed out? some If I put the three in frames on a wall, identically lit, each a few metres apart with different test images, very few could say with certainty which printer was used and I'd not put that much money on myself getting it 100% right. Give the same test image for three people to print, with no particular printing skills and default printer setups, and the differences would be much more obvious. As to 'how much' difference? First give me an agreed methodology on how you wish to define and measure 'different'... ;-)
@@KeithCooper sorry for not making it clear. Let's say an image XYZ.TIF in SRBG profile print using photoshop. In the print dialog use let printer manage colours. using only canon satin Paper SG-201 with the can ned ICC profile by canon for each of the three printer ( or any standard paper with canned ICC profile that is available for the three printer). No Frame just bare prints. I am curious as I just had a print done with the Epson SC-P807 on an Epson Premium Semigloss Paper using printer manage colours and also a print made with the Canon PIXMA iP8770 with canon SG201 Satin (similar surface compared to Epson) with the same setting. The Canon Print has a 3D Pop that the epson does not have. I am planning to get a 24in or 36in LFP and I am wondering does the number of inks makes the images better. ie more saturated colours, deeper blacks, more colours rendered etc. Maybe a custom paper profile would produce a better image but investing in a paper profiler would be out of my league. hope to hear some wise words from you thanks. keep up there amazing review
Ah...Why would I limit source images to sRGB? That benefits the cheaper printers more... It's like testing a performance car on public roads with traffic and speed limits... You are essentially comparing the workflow which made two prints as much as any 'Canon vs Epson' differences. Just one example - even with canned profiles, rendering intents make a difference There are loads of potential reasons... The better the printer, the better results it is possible to get, but that needs attention to the whole workflow... There are no quality oriented printers at 36", so it's 24" or 44" At the moment the Canon PRO-2600 might suit more - but the limitation of any of these 'better' printers is the person using them [myself included] ;-)
I would be interested to see how the new printer handles cycle times in regards to how often you need to print to avoid going into its cleaning mode where it drains a bit of ink.
Unfortunately, there is no easy way for me to test this if I get a printer just for the review. I wasn't able to cover this when I reviewed the pro-1000 when it came out either
Morning Keith, something I've always wondered about with Canon printers and I guess it would be extremely difficult to prove one way or the other, is, do Canon printers favour Canon camera colour science / profiles. In other words, say a Nikon camera is used to generate image, does that data get through all the jpeg or whatever conversions and influence the final print.
Do you think the new printer will be more efficient with the inks? I can't seem to find any desk printers having high capacity cheap pigment inks with the full range, we really need a kind of pro-1000 ecotank style, it would put all competition in the dust
No difference in any significant way would be my initial assumption. Slightly different inks and the same print head... No chance of that sort of printer for several years yet, if I had to put a bet on it...
Have they improved the minimum droplet size? Canon make several improvement claims: better inks, longer print life, but also improved robustness/reliability of the printer. And yes, it's important how the new (?) print head works, needs to make prints as "maintenance" cycles. Most interested to see what the actual colour space is that you will no doubt measure in your tests. I fell you have been implying that something new was on the horizon in this printer segment since early this year. My main question now is, "what will Epson do?"
Thank you for all your excellent reviews. One of your reviews was the deciding factor in selecting the Epson ET-8550 which is perfect for my printing needs. I am looking forward to your review of the Canon 1100, alrhough it is too "heavy" for my needs. I think Canon could have considerably improved this latest printer had they done away with cartridges and used refillable tanks. Good luck with your reviews.
OK, it’s clear you can’t use the new inks in the PRO-1000, BUT can the old inks be used in the PRO-1100??? I ask because I have a 7 year old PRO-1000 that is starting to throw up error code 7400 after printing, albeit inconsistently. Unfortunately I have 8 replacement tanks in the drawer ready to replace those that are currently running low! Thanks.
I suspect that even if the carts fit, the new printer won't recognise them. More of an issue is that they are the 'wrong' colours, so may well affect print quality to some degree Keep them until closer to the expiry date, when PRO-1000 inks may be a bit less available?
The main thing for me is to know if there is visually a difference between prints from the 1000 and 1100 using your standard test prints. Looking forward to watching your review soon. Thanks 🙏
No ETA on the printer from Canon yet I'm afraid. Slightly tricky to answer your question, since it depends on getting an identical print made on a PRO-1000, with the same paper and a profile which I've created. Otherwise how to know why any difference does/does not exist. However, I'll be surprised an awful lot if there is any huge difference with most images. Most likely is the slightly deeper black on art papers, least likely colour. Certainly, the example I saw on another pro-1100 video absolutely didn't convince me ;-)
@@KeithCooper thanks very much for kind reply. Would be great if someone could provide you with a PRO 1000 to compare but understand this is difficult. I agree I don’t think there will be big differences as print quality of the 1000 is exceptional already
I'll be waiting and watching for your review. I'm needing a new 17" printer. My old IPF6400 has gone through two sets of heads and I now longer need to print 24" wide prints. Roll paper is very handy though and I'll miss that feature.
Hi Keith, Great video as always. Do you know if this new canon has replaceable ink absorbing tank? My current one Pro 300 is telling me that the tank is almost full and apparently when is full thats it? I'm strongly considering to buy the Epson P900 now, which you also did great review. Thanks
Hi Keith, thanks for your work, your videos are always detailed and interesting. I have been waiting for this printer for a long time but I had a bad surprise, I could not use it with my mac. I need to use this printer with an obsolete mac that cannot go beyond OS Catalina, Canon makes this printer compatible with the OS after Catalina, namely Big Sur and does this for the first time, even the pro 2600 is compatible with Catalina (mac OS 10.15) while the drivers for this printer are available from Big Sure (mac OS 11) I understand that this is a computer issue but could you tell me if there is a possibility to install drivers for this printer on a mac OS Catalina (10.15)? Thanks to you or to whoever can answer me.
@@KeithCooper Thanks! Indeed yes, Catalina still works very well but unfortunately the pro 1100 is the first printer that Canon makes incompatible with OS 10.15, as already mentioned, even the 2600 has drivers available for Catalina. If it may be necessary for your further investigation, I noticed that Canon does not provide the drivers but the downloadable software are all compatible (I am always talking about Catalina) and in addition I saw an official presentation video by CanonUSA which (unlike what is reported in the technical sheet) declares full compatibility with macOS 10.12 th-cam.com/video/tN2LKXUVBwg/w-d-xo.htmlsi=4HDGyNh1Bi6WuVkb&t=71 I await your response before considering the purchase, thanks again.
Is this the nearest equivalent Canon to the Epson P5370? I was put off the Epson P5370 in conversation with you, when I discovered that it is unsuitable for someone such as myself taking long retirement travel holidays, because the printer needs to be regularly used, and neglecting it for more than a month will lead to major problems. I still haven't bought my retirement printer. So, my question to you Keith, is will the Canon Pro-1100 be any better than the Epson in this regard?
Having had a 1000 and been very impressed by the quality, it had to go as I was not printing enough and the regular cleaning cycle was using far more ink than I did. I have read somewhere that the newer Canon printersare a little more economical with ink being used for cleaning. I might consider getting the 1100 if the printer is less thirsty in this regard. Figures on cost per print don't give the full picture 🙂. Can your tests include this information please?
Ah, where did you read this about ink use? I have seen no authoritative info on this question relating to the 1100. It's tricky for me to reliably test this since I've only got the printer here for a month. Nothing about using the printer suggests any significant change to the 1000 [important word being 'significant' there]
Impressed with the black density, particularly on some Awagami papers I tried (though Kozo natural isn't as nice for people, rather than the white 😅 ) - Couple of other changes to PPL too for the custom lengths.
All large format printer manufacturers have peaked in the technology. They are getting only very minor improvements. They need to start lowering the costs of the consumables, most notably INK cost!
Yes - advances in actual print technology have been slowing for a few years. That doesn't mean there are not other areas to work on, but I'm expecting 'ink tank' printers to move up market. That and ink bags rather than carts for 'large format' [i.e. not printers like this] - but I don't see consumable costs coming down in that area
What's interesting is that the list price here in America is $1299.00. I don't understand why it's less expensive here unless the Japanese consider the $ safer. It looks like a great printer and I'll probably be saving up to purchase one. Looking forward to your comprehensive review.
I'm told prices get set in $ based at the then Yen to $ rate and then the exchange rate at that time is used for other countries. However, for cameras Canon have a track record of using a $1 to £1 rate plus adding a few hundred £ on top for no reason they have been able to explain to me! Given that its £1099 UK and $1299 US that's actually a better deal than normal for UK customers. If this had come out about a year ago I'd possibly have bought it over the Pro300 I went for.
I think in the US you need to add sales tax to the list price. In the Eu VAT is included in the list price. But that still does not explain the whole price difference
If the price is set to be 1400 euro, then I would like to hear (once you have tested it), how it compares to the recommended epson (8550 I think it was?) that you mention fairly frequently. I believe in my country the epson would be about 900 euros. Is the price difference worth it for the average joe or is the cost of inks still going to be such that the epson edges it out? Cheers!
@@hedydd2 I guess, but for the difference in price it seems like an interesting proposition. To me €900 is already way beyond what I would consider if I don't know that I want to do printing regularly. So for me at least I would be tempted by the 500 diff simply because it would be a state of the art printer in that case.
@@Salaaran Not only is it more expensive to buy than the Epson 8500 but the ink cost is likely to be several times as high in my experience. However if you have a need for the extra capabilities of the new Canon, and I’m sure many do, the excess purchase and running cost may well be justified. Wait for Keith’s review. I’m sure it will be a most interesting one.
@@hedydd2 of for sure, I am not in any rush at all, and I think I am unlikely to ever go this far out in terms of quality. Maybe a flawed analogy, but when I was playing a lot of guitar I Knew I wanted a specific model of les paul, so back then I decided to skip a "step" as the difference between the two was that great. So it would be interesting to see that question addressed. I frankly don't know how long the pigments/inks lasts on the pro series vs the epson :) Cheers mate
Two very different markets - the 8550 appeals to people concerned about ink costs, who still want a good printer. Remember that I rarely use the word 'best' without a lot of caveats. It's precisely because no-one remembers the caveats that I'm loathe to ever 'recommend' products
After you've put this through its paces, it would be interesting to see a "shoot-out" (although I know you don't do those!) between the 1100 and the Epson P900, as they seem to be the two obvious choices for relatively low-volume "fine art" use. I changed from Canon to Epson due to abysmal customer "service" from Canon and the P900 has served me well since I got it shortly after its intro, plus the 1000/1100 are huge/heavy. I've yet to try a longer than 22" print (it's supposed to handle up to 10' 9" or 3.3m) so I don't have the roll adapter, but I wonder if I could just manually feed a cut sheet (and how well will the 1100 handle that?).
Would be interested to see how easy it is to connect up. Took me two days to get my Pro-1000 connected to my Mac system! The Canon website and support were next to useless. The guys at Fotospeed were far more helpful.
Ink consumption in maintenance cycles is a big issue for me - P900 was much more economical. Would like an increase in total speed - not of actual printing, but the pfaffing around before and after. P900 is quicker. I had two P900s, but print feeding was very unreliable and they scratched delicate papers. No problem with the Pro-1000. Print quality not an issue for either printer.
Dear Mr. Cooper, I own a Mitsubishi CP-M1A dye-sublimation printer which does 6” x 8” maximum print size. I am quite happy with it, when and if I can get it to work. I am especially happy with the fact that I don’t have to fuss with any ink, nor any maintenance whatsoever. But it looks like Mitsubishi have now stopped producing these printers. I am now looking for a replacement printer. My questions to you are as follows: 1- Do you have any experience with Sawgrass, DNP or any other make of professional dye sub photo printers? 2- Would a Canon imagePROGRAF PRO-1100 printer provide me better image quality than any of these, and why? Thank you in advance for your time and dedication to quality.
Sorry - I've not done any such testing of those [I need companies to loan me kit for testing] The 1100 is not necessarily what I'd think of to replace such a printer - a lot depends on what you do with the prints and the volume. I'll have a look though once one turns up to test.
@@KeithCooper Well, maybe Canon would be willing to loan you a Canon SELPHY CP1500 Wireless Compact Photo Printer, which is a dye-sublimation printer, along with a box of Canon KP-108IN comprised of three KP-36IP Photo Paper and three Color Ink Cassette giving you a total of 108 4"x6" Sheets.
I think for those of us that are happy with the 1000 model we already have, the question is how long will Canon continue to supply 1000 carts given the 4100 carts aren't compatible?
Do a thorough web search as there currently is one retailer that has the Pro 1000 on sale now for $949.00 vs. the minimal $100.00 off Canon is now "promoting".
The fact that the 1100 doesn't have roll paper support is a bit disappointing. Did you say 8 years between the 1000 & 1100? To not offer that feature is not very "Pro" of Canon. Seems like it would've been better to replace that 5100 model you briefly mentioned which did allow roll paper then the 1000. So it looks like Canon loyalists will have to choose between the 1100 if they can easily live without the roll paper support or the 2600 if they can't, which is both considerably bigger & also more expen$ive.
To me, the Pro-1100 is just a slightly updated Pro-1000, using different inks and a change in FW to accommodate the new inks and the 1Gbit LAN as well as printing up to 3.27m . No Paper Roll. Printing 1.2m on the current Pro-1000 is already a pain. Not to mention at 3.27m. I will keep my Pro-1000 as well as the spare one, which was cheaper than a new print head and a complete set of inks.
Keith, when you test the printer, please test the *scuff and water resistance of the new chroma optimizer* that's supposed to be more scratch resistant. I've mentioned before how this could *help prints be hung without needing spray or glass protection,* which would be a great blessing, since spraying prints is toxic and unhealthy, and glass and acrylic reflect light, obscuring our work, unless anti-reflection coated, which is expensive. Not having to protect the prints would save a step and costs - would be very practical. I'm aware your scratch tests would not be precise, but would be good enough to give us an idea if the new chroma optimizer will help protect prints from scratches, liquids and probably even ozone.
I've no idea how to test this in a meaningful way - it's not really that much different from before. It will not replace sprays or glazing - it is the wax part of the new ink [not the optimiser] - read the PRO-x600 marketing materials. The optimiser is no more 'wonder coating' than the old one This is not the coating you are looking for
@@KeithCooper Thanks for explaining that the wax is in the inks, which could be even better if the optimizer has some sealant properties with or without the wax. I'm still hopeful. It wouldn't be that hard to A/B test with a print from a previous generation printer on the same paper. The same small amount of water could be dropped on it, and compare the effect after so many minutes. Both could be scratched in the same way. Both could be handled with unclean hands to see how they differ in fingerprints showing. Not having to spray or put glass over prints would be a Godsend!
I don't have a 1000 to make any comparison prints I'm afraid I see nothing in Canon's marketing materials to suggest that the wax does anything more than make the surface a bit more resistant to gross scratch damage. The sort of damage you should never see if you take reasonable care!. It's aimed at commercial users handling/stacking prints. Your wishes are destined to remain wishes I suspect...
@@KeithCooper Someday, someone will A/B test this. Then we'll know for sure. I'm still not printing photos, but if and when I do again I'm really interested in finding out how well this inkset does without protection. If you know someone locally who has a previous generation Canon of any size that has the previous generation inks, their prints could be tested against the 1100 you're getting, using the same paper of course. Canon only has the chroma optimizer, which can cover the bare white paper, uninked areas. I know you like Epson, but this could be a big advantage, especially if the chroma optimizer is tough enough and repels water - which means it could also protect the paper from dust and ozone. It must help some, and maybe a lot.
This printer absolutely does not have the sort of 'coating' you seem to be looking for? If it did what you are hoping for, it would be plastered all over Canon's marketing materials ;-) As to liking Epson - yes, but the last 44" printer I owned was a Canon one and before that an Epson one ;-) I want what best suits my work. At 17" for example, I want roll paper and a cutter - there are only two printers which do that P5000 and P5300 [hence my mention of the Canon iPF5100 in the video] Makes for a very easy choice ;-)
-So with new inks you have to use only canon ink? -Do you have to use daily to keep head clean? -Are there better programs that are downloadable from canon or anyone else that we can use with this printer?
Personally, I would only use Canon inks anyway... I'm sure people will eventually produce cheaper ink. What sort of programs? The Canon PPL software is not bad for free. I'll be showing this when I get one here to test.
@@KeithCooper I have PPL and I need a crash course on how to use it. I had trouble just printing two 5 x 7 on a letter size paper on my Pro 200. I’m still learning so much.. this is why I bought the pro 200. Hopefully I can upgrade to a Pro 1100 or 1000 as I print more.
My Pro-1000 died about a year ago. First year I had it, it developed a squeal. Didn't know what it was and just couldn't make it to the repair center within the year warranty. When it died, all lcd text was in Japanese or Chinese and nothing functioned. I realized at that point that the squeal was a bad resister. Pathetic for modern day electronics. I did get five years out of the unit but, I surely didn't overtax it. One other word of advice, last time I talked to Canon, they stated that they no longer had authorized repair centers. Hope you live near a big city. I doubt anyone in a small city is going to take on these repairs. And, in spite of all the griping, I'd buy the Pro 1100 in a heartbeat.
Scratch resistance is a real thing. My Epson SC P800 scratches all fine art papers and loads them all skewed. Epson's solution was "only use Epson papers otherwise we cannot guarantee print quality". I will never buy Epson again. Hello Canon!
Keith, since Canon has chosen not to offer a roll feed option, *please warn* potential customers in all of your video and written reviews of this printer that *3:2 ratio paper, 17 x 25 inch is not available in the most famous brands* like Hahnemuhle, Canson, Epson and even Canon, which only come in 17 x 22 inch (4:3 ratio). Most photographers have 3:2 sensors, so mostly shoot in 3:2. They'll be sorely disappointed that they can't use the most well known papers in this printer. In the US, Red River, Moab and Inkpress come in 17 x 25 inch, but they don't replicate all of the famous brands' papers, and usually, only the famous brand papers are tested for print permanence, which can be a factor for those selling prints. Canon should say on the front of the box and in their promos that paper for 3:2 ratio shooters (almost everyone) isn't available even in their own brand. I can't understand how they think it's okay not to include a roll paper option, since even Canon doesn't make 3:2 size paper in 17 inches. In Europe, if I remember correctly from our discussions, the same is true, except a few retailers had some Hahnemuhle in 3:2. This is so strange. Makes no sense that they keep doing this, so we must warn photographers ourselves, so they don't get had.
I guess the issue (which is not Canon-specific) would mostly affect those who are going for borderless prints. And in order to address it those users could cut a sheet according to a 3:2 ratio from roll paper and then feed it to the printer. Admittedly it would take an extra step to get there, but it would not involve too much work on the user’s part, I think.
I'll note available paper sizes, as I do with every printer, but I hardly feel a warning is needed. Here, paper comes in 'A' sizes so those inch sizes you mention won't mean much to many people. I'll be printing on A2 and lengths chopped from 17" roll = that and A3+ [13x19] which is of course 3:2 with a half inch border
@@KeithCooper We discussed this before. If I remember correctly, the same problem applies in Europe; though, you know the dimensions better than me. Many admitted this is a serious problem in the thread you started at DPReview. If you don't say anything in your videos and in the main body of your reviews, customers will learn the hard way after it's too late that they can't use their favorite papers with this printer. [Most are not going to cut by hand from a roll, which isn't precise, is time consuming, needs tools and a work surface. Then they'll have to fight the curl.] Canon won't want you to say anything, but the people deserve to hear the truth so they know what they're getting into. It's just RIDICULOUS that these paper companies don't provide full size 17" paper for 3:2 aspect ratio prints, the aspect ratio of the vast majority of cameras!
@@KeithCooper Thanks for asking them. The solution is to buy a 17" printer that has a roll feed (not a Canon, it looks like) or a 24", which can use 17" rolls; though, it's way bigger and more money.
the one million question IS THE CANON 1100 STILL WASTING YOUR EXPENSIVE INK TROUGH THE DRAIN WHEN FLUSHING EVERY WEEK .LOOKS LIKE THE SAME . 'WHEN PRINTING NO BIG NUMBERS? I WAITED TO BUY THIS MACHINE ,BUT I NO LIKE TROWING MONEY FOR NOTHING. REGARDS THEO.
![Epson vs Canon. What's the best 17 inch printer for you? P900 vs PRO-1100 vs P5300 [P5370]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/48g3F23eick/mqdefault.jpg)
If anyone wants to pre-order from B&H in the US, I have an affiliate link which helps fund the channel bhpho.to/4dJkpmL
I also have a 'tips jar' at Ko-fi if you'd like to support my testing work ko-fi.com/keithcooper
Note to anyone wanting to pre-order. When you place your pre-order with B&H, your credit card will be charge immediately. If this is a problem, or if you have a working 17" printer now, you may wish to wait until the printers are actually shipping. My Epson 3880 is dead, so it's worth it to me to get a new printer asap, and if paying now gets me a printer sooner, then OK. Otherwise, $1,400 now for a printer later, might not be the best use or one's funds. Just saying...
Thanks for pointing that out - I did not know they did that
Several times over the last few months I have had the Pro 1000 in my cart to purchase but never did. The main reason was the age of 8 years, I figured a refresh had to be coming out which likely meant new inks. I am glad I waited. Thanks for sharing!
Yes, I strongly suspected it was coming, at the beginning of the year, when they announced the new inks for the 2600 - looking forward to actually trying it out!
I can tell that you are really looking forwards to getting to grips with this printer. Excited even. A true enthusiast.
Well spotted ;-)
Many years ago I owned a Pixma Pro 9000 printer that used 8 tiny ink cartridges that were at the time pretty expensive to replace at ~$140. Looking at the current batch of Canon printers I'm seeing inksets that are an eyewatering $700 USD. I actually thew away the Pixma away rather than buy another set of ink. It was like there was a cost analysis that had to go in before I'd make a print. Today I'm using an Epson ET-8550 and couldn't be happier. The images that come out of it amaze me with every print, the inkjet consists of 5 different colors, and ~$130-ish gets you 5 huge bottles of ink to refill it. It lasts forever, and gives me the freedom to print whatever and whenever I want without the cost analysis. $700 for an inkset seems to be insanity.
Yes - that's why the 8550 gets one of my very few 'best' stickers ;-)
6 months ago my 7 year old Pro-1000 died, however Canon replaced it at no cost. At the time I cynically thought, they must be getting ready to introduce a new printer and are purging their stock of 1000s. Well, here we are. Looking forward to seeing your review on the 1100. Don't think I'll change right away, though, unless the inks are significantly different. Thanks for the update, Keith.
Thanks - should be quite some life left in your PRO-1000 ;-)
NO WAY!!!! I have been waiting for for this to come out for nearly 5 years. Can't wait for the full review and write-up. Cost of ink relative to prints, cleaning cycle use, and black & white, blue, and red performance compared to the others like the PR0-1000, PRO-200 (my current printer), and maybe some of Epson's product would be of interest to me. It looks like it will be going for only $1,299 in the United States. Great work Keith!
Thanks - building up my list of stuff to test!
Love watching your videos before retiring for the night.
Thanks :-)
This is great news, thank you Keith for the update. Finally I can make a decision between the 1100 and 2600. It's probably going to come down to how well the 1100 handles the long sheets of paper. Looking forward to your detailed reviews on these 2 printers.
Yes - feeding a 10 foot sheet of 17" paper will be interesting ;-)
definitely would not want to have to do that on a regular basis, 4'' on the 1000 is stressful enough already.
I print maybe 3 large prints per month. Just bought the 1000 five months ago. I don’t see a compelling reason to drain the ink, box it up and sell it for half of what I paid for a few minor updates. Thanks for updating us with this video.
Indeed - I think few will find a compelling argument to swap...
I'm curious to know if the "wax" added to the new inks will make head clogs and cleaning cycles more of a problem. Especially for folks who use the printer weekly but not every day.
Yes - something I'm also thinking about...
Very much looking forward to you testing this!
Thanks!
Excellent news....if only I had £1400! lol Really looking forward to seeing your review of this one. 🙂
You and me both! I was expecting a fair bit of "Is that it?" - but the 1000 is a solid printer
Just looking and 'only' £1099 at many UK suppliers... ;-)
@KeithCooper Considering that it's priced the same as the 1000, it's an easy choice. Unless it has a big flaw or one gets a good deal on the 1000 in sale.
Looking forward to this Keith, thanks for the news
Yes, no solid ETA but at least it settles what's in the market for the next 18 months or so...
Exciting times. Would love to know if new printer also has a new improved software. Great channel. Thanks
Still the same PPL software, but will definitely check what can be done.
@@KeithCooper thanks Keith. Looking forward to it.
Love that initial shot of John Lewis Leicester? I was the Electrical Project Manager for the build back in 2009 I believe it was!
Splendid - a rather more crowded spot than then - buildings completed over the other side of the road. You'll see the area in quite a few of my lens reviews too
@@KeithCooper I remember there being an earthquake too when staying in the Premier Inn around that time. Is the new Canon Pro-1100 any faster at printing than the Pro-1000 as I still find it pain but worth the wait!
@@SimonWestPhotography I doubt there is any significant change in print speed.
I missed the quake, being at the pub that night - Karen however was at home and noticed the floors bouncing :-)
This may come off as too amateur of a question, but would this printer be a proper one to get for exclusively black and white printing? Or are there printers that do black and white more properly with more gradations of inks to cover a larger range for proper black and white images?
A very reasonable question - I tested B&W quite extensively when I reviewed the PRO-1000, and it did well.
This will be a key part of my testing to come
Good morning Keith.
First of all: one of the main problems with the pro1000 was ink consumption, because you have to print every one or two days otherwise the printing automatically starts a cleaning session. Could you test if the print management is the same for the new one?
Second: I am a happy owner of an Epson P900 printer. Could you compare the two printers, explain the differences and suggest whether buying a new Canon is an upgrade from the Epson P900? Thank you Keith for all you do for us print enthusiasts.
There is no difference, as far as I know at the moment, in the cleaning side of the 1000 and 1100. Obviously I'll look at this when one is here.
As to a 900/1100 comparison - that will be tricky, but I'll give it some thought
From what I've read, the cleaning cycles happen even if you print, however they stay at the smaller level rather than rocketing up through the levels.
Excessive cleaning is part of the reason I went for Epson. I can accept there is sometimes a need to clean, but surely not every so many hours regardless of operating conditions.
@@jameswalker7874 Absolutely true! I am so tired of continually buying maintenance carts just to keep it running! If they fixed that I would definitely upgrade in the near future!
My suspicion is that we will see no appreciable change here...
Thanks very much for these vids 👍
Thanks - glad they are of interest
I’d always assumed the Epson 900 was much smaller just because it was newer tech, so I expected any pro 1000 replacement to similarly reduce the footprint - but this seems to be the exact same exterior as the 1000 with some internal / ink changes. What is it that makes the Canon printers so much larger / allows Epson to be much smaller?
Design parameters and targeted market segment...
The 900 is aimed at a market which values compactness and cares about weight.
Purely product marketing strategies ;-)
Thanks Keith. One more question - with there being no roll support, how exactly would you print something 10ft long (or even 3ft long)? Is it just a case of using a roll but having to hold the paper up behind the feeder? That sounds very impractical if so. Looking forward to your 10ft print!
Yes - manual feeding!
Not sure where I'll be doing this, but I'll give it a go!
I'd like to see included in the test it's resistance to ink dumps if moved or tilted when moved as this was a problem that put me off the 1000 reported in forums.
Also a similarly reported problem of ink flushing when a cartridge is replaced with either it's line or all lines generating a cascade effect, thinking of it's robustness if placed on a rolling support or if it needs shifting in an office situation when trying out panamara prints.
Something I'll test if only I get enough spare ink from Canon, along with a spare maintenance cart...
Printers like this do not generally like movement of what they are sitting on - but pano work will need care in siting the printer
okay need to know if there max paper size you can use in this printer. also fact i only print ever so often. and when college ends in second week of may i do not print again in till middle of aug. will still be good for me. also from 2 week of nov to first week of jan i do not print. also might be weeks where do not need print for college season too. why looking at pro-1000. also want to print 13x19 can i print on pro-300 too
Don’t buy this printer.
The 1100 is not necessarily one I'd suggest for such intermittent use
Thanks Keith, nice to see a really early summary and looking forward to your in-depth review next month. Question: will the Pro-1000 continue to be supported (inks etc...) for the foreseeable?
I'm told for 'quite some time' - Canon is generally fairly good with this.
Looks as if it will be mid September before anything turns up here.
Good video 👍🏼 One thing that crossed my mind was, is it possible to run the ”old” inq in the new printer? I’m thinking that the old printer did awesome prints so the old inq are going to be cheaper and probably ”good enogh” for a person like me. The other way arround you did answer in the video. Keep up the good work and i almost can’t wait until the review 🙏🏻
Thank - My feeling is that the old ink carts 'won't work' in the new one. That and the differences would show in print quality [the blacks for example]
I am curious would you see a difference of an image that is printed with a 12 ink pigment base inkjet printer, the Canon TC-20 and a pixma iP8720 on the same media. lets assume it to be lustre paper. if there is a difference how much difference would there be.
Would _I_ see the differences between the three, using custom icc profiles and a standard test image... Putting them next to each other. Yes, because I test printers/papers.
How many others would see the differences if it wan't pointed out? some
If I put the three in frames on a wall, identically lit, each a few metres apart with different test images, very few could say with certainty which printer was used and I'd not put that much money on myself getting it 100% right.
Give the same test image for three people to print, with no particular printing skills and default printer setups, and the differences would be much more obvious.
As to 'how much' difference? First give me an agreed methodology on how you wish to define and measure 'different'... ;-)
@@KeithCooper sorry for not making it clear. Let's say an image XYZ.TIF in SRBG profile print using photoshop. In the print dialog use let printer manage colours. using only canon satin Paper SG-201 with the can ned ICC profile by canon for each of the three printer ( or any standard paper with canned ICC profile that is available for the three printer). No Frame just bare prints. I am curious as I just had a print done with the Epson SC-P807 on an Epson Premium Semigloss Paper using printer manage colours and also a print made with the Canon PIXMA iP8770 with canon SG201 Satin (similar surface compared to Epson) with the same setting. The Canon Print has a 3D Pop that the epson does not have. I am planning to get a 24in or 36in LFP and I am wondering does the number of inks makes the images better. ie more saturated colours, deeper blacks, more colours rendered etc. Maybe a custom paper profile would produce a better image but investing in a paper profiler would be out of my league. hope to hear some wise words from you thanks. keep up there amazing review
Ah...Why would I limit source images to sRGB? That benefits the cheaper printers more...
It's like testing a performance car on public roads with traffic and speed limits...
You are essentially comparing the workflow which made two prints as much as any 'Canon vs Epson' differences.
Just one example - even with canned profiles, rendering intents make a difference
There are loads of potential reasons...
The better the printer, the better results it is possible to get, but that needs attention to the whole workflow...
There are no quality oriented printers at 36", so it's 24" or 44"
At the moment the Canon PRO-2600 might suit more - but the limitation of any of these 'better' printers is the person using them [myself included] ;-)
I would be interested to see how the new printer handles cycle times in regards to how often you need to print to avoid going into its cleaning mode where it drains a bit of ink.
Unfortunately, there is no easy way for me to test this if I get a printer just for the review.
I wasn't able to cover this when I reviewed the pro-1000 when it came out either
Morning Keith, something I've always wondered about with Canon printers and I guess it would be extremely difficult to prove one way or the other, is, do Canon printers favour Canon camera colour science / profiles. In other words, say a Nikon camera is used to generate image, does that data get through all the jpeg or whatever conversions and influence the final print.
I've never come across anything which suggests that, but I'm creating full custom profiles
Do you think the new printer will be more efficient with the inks? I can't seem to find any desk printers having high capacity cheap pigment inks with the full range, we really need a kind of pro-1000 ecotank style, it would put all competition in the dust
No difference in any significant way would be my initial assumption. Slightly different inks and the same print head...
No chance of that sort of printer for several years yet, if I had to put a bet on it...
Have they improved the minimum droplet size? Canon make several improvement claims: better inks, longer print life, but also improved robustness/reliability of the printer. And yes, it's important how the new (?) print head works, needs to make prints as "maintenance" cycles.
Most interested to see what the actual colour space is that you will no doubt measure in your tests.
I fell you have been implying that something new was on the horizon in this printer segment since early this year. My main question now is, "what will Epson do?"
Same print head, so no change there.
For Epson I'm not expecting anything significant for at least 18 months
@@KeithCooper HAHA,AND AFTER 18 MONTHS.
Thank you for all your excellent reviews. One of your reviews was the deciding factor in selecting the Epson ET-8550 which is perfect for my printing needs. I am looking forward to your review of the Canon 1100, alrhough it is too "heavy" for my needs. I think Canon could have considerably improved this latest printer had they done away with cartridges and used refillable tanks. Good luck with your reviews.
Thanks - yes a somewhat limited update in many respects
OK, it’s clear you can’t use the new inks in the PRO-1000, BUT can the old inks be used in the PRO-1100??? I ask because I have a 7 year old PRO-1000 that is starting to throw up error code 7400 after printing, albeit inconsistently. Unfortunately I have 8 replacement tanks in the drawer ready to replace those that are currently running low! Thanks.
I suspect that even if the carts fit, the new printer won't recognise them.
More of an issue is that they are the 'wrong' colours, so may well affect print quality to some degree
Keep them until closer to the expiry date, when PRO-1000 inks may be a bit less available?
The main thing for me is to know if there is visually a difference between prints from the 1000 and 1100 using your standard test prints. Looking forward to watching your review soon. Thanks 🙏
No ETA on the printer from Canon yet I'm afraid.
Slightly tricky to answer your question, since it depends on getting an identical print made on a PRO-1000, with the same paper and a profile which I've created. Otherwise how to know why any difference does/does not exist.
However, I'll be surprised an awful lot if there is any huge difference with most images.
Most likely is the slightly deeper black on art papers, least likely colour. Certainly, the example I saw on another pro-1100 video absolutely didn't convince me ;-)
@@KeithCooper thanks very much for kind reply. Would be great if someone could provide you with a PRO 1000 to compare but understand this is difficult. I agree I don’t think there will be big differences as print quality of the 1000 is exceptional already
Hi, does the new cartridge fit on the pro 1000? If so, can i ise it creating new icc profiles ?
No, won't work I'm afraid
@@KeithCooper thank You.
I'll be waiting and watching for your review. I'm needing a new 17" printer. My old IPF6400 has gone through two sets of heads and I now longer need to print 24" wide prints. Roll paper is very handy though and I'll miss that feature.
I'm hoping to start mid September, but it depends on Canon getting me a printer ;-)
Hi Keith, Great video as always. Do you know if this new canon has replaceable
ink absorbing tank? My current one Pro 300 is telling me that the tank is almost full and apparently when is full thats it?
I'm strongly considering to buy the Epson P900 now, which you also did great review. Thanks
The 1000/1100 have proper replaceable maintenance tanks - very different to the PRO-300
Thank you, Keith.
Thanks
I've been waiting for the update on the PRO1000, as always a great review, do you know what the ink costs are like ?
Comparable to the 1000.
Similar - but I'm hearing ink stocks are not going to be in good supply to start with [from a UK re-seller]
Hi Keith, thanks for your work, your videos are always detailed and interesting.
I have been waiting for this printer for a long time but I had a bad surprise, I could not use it with my mac. I need to use this printer with an obsolete mac that cannot go beyond OS Catalina, Canon makes this printer compatible with the OS after Catalina, namely Big Sur and does this for the first time, even the pro 2600 is compatible with Catalina (mac OS 10.15) while the drivers for this printer are available from Big Sure (mac OS 11)
I understand that this is a computer issue but could you tell me if there is a possibility to install drivers for this printer on a mac OS Catalina (10.15)? Thanks to you or to whoever can answer me.
Won't be able to say until I have one here - I have such a Mac for some work [where it is still excellent]
@@KeithCooper Thanks! Indeed yes, Catalina still works very well but unfortunately the pro 1100 is the first printer that Canon makes incompatible with OS 10.15, as already mentioned, even the 2600 has drivers available for Catalina. If it may be necessary for your further investigation, I noticed that Canon does not provide the drivers but the downloadable software are all compatible (I am always talking about Catalina) and in addition I saw an official presentation video by CanonUSA which (unlike what is reported in the technical sheet) declares full compatibility with macOS 10.12
th-cam.com/video/tN2LKXUVBwg/w-d-xo.htmlsi=4HDGyNh1Bi6WuVkb&t=71
I await your response before considering the purchase, thanks again.
Is this the nearest equivalent Canon to the Epson P5370? I was put off the Epson P5370 in conversation with you, when I discovered that it is unsuitable for someone such as myself taking long retirement travel holidays, because the printer needs to be regularly used, and neglecting it for more than a month will lead to major problems. I still haven't bought my retirement printer. So, my question to you Keith, is will the Canon Pro-1100 be any better than the Epson in this regard?
No, not in this respect...
So, if the new INK cartridges will not work with the Pro 1000, means the old one's will be discontinue?
Definitely not in the next few years. Canon normally supports printers for quite a while
Having had a 1000 and been very impressed by the quality, it had to go as I was not printing enough and the regular cleaning cycle was using far more ink than I did. I have read somewhere that the newer Canon printersare a little more economical with ink being used for cleaning. I might consider getting the 1100 if the printer is less thirsty in this regard. Figures on cost per print don't give the full picture 🙂. Can your tests include this information please?
Ah, where did you read this about ink use?
I have seen no authoritative info on this question relating to the 1100.
It's tricky for me to reliably test this since I've only got the printer here for a month.
Nothing about using the printer suggests any significant change to the 1000 [important word being 'significant' there]
@@KeithCooper I'm afraid I can't remember where I read about the newer Canon printers.
Impressed with the black density, particularly on some Awagami papers I tried (though Kozo natural isn't as nice for people, rather than the white 😅 ) - Couple of other changes to PPL too for the custom lengths.
Thanks
The Mk black is the same one as used in the PRO-300 IIRC
Doesn’t have the PRO-1100 12 ink cartridges vs. 10 for the PRO-1000?
No, both have 12 - exactly the same, but for the inks in them
Can you use the old ink on the 1100?
No, not at all.
@@KeithCooper Ok, thanks for your swift reply.
Do you know if the new inks will work in the 1000?
As mentioned in the video - no
Maybe someone will try it, but not officially
All large format printer manufacturers have peaked in the technology. They are getting only very minor improvements. They need to start lowering the costs of the consumables, most notably INK cost!
Yes - advances in actual print technology have been slowing for a few years.
That doesn't mean there are not other areas to work on, but I'm expecting 'ink tank' printers to move up market.
That and ink bags rather than carts for 'large format' [i.e. not printers like this] - but I don't see consumable costs coming down in that area
What's interesting is that the list price here in America is $1299.00. I don't understand why it's less expensive here unless the Japanese consider the $ safer. It looks like a great printer and I'll probably be saving up to purchase one. Looking forward to your comprehensive review.
Yes - I make no pretence at understanding how international product pricing works ;-)
My guess is that you have to add the tax to the price
I'm told prices get set in $ based at the then Yen to $ rate and then the exchange rate at that time is used for other countries. However, for cameras Canon have a track record of using a $1 to £1 rate plus adding a few hundred £ on top for no reason they have been able to explain to me! Given that its £1099 UK and $1299 US that's actually a better deal than normal for UK customers. If this had come out about a year ago I'd possibly have bought it over the Pro300 I went for.
I think in the US you need to add sales tax to the list price. In the Eu VAT is included in the list price. But that still does not explain the whole price difference
@@poni7373 Some states like Florida and New Hampshire don't have a sales tax.
If the price is set to be 1400 euro, then I would like to hear (once you have tested it), how it compares to the recommended epson (8550 I think it was?) that you mention fairly frequently. I believe in my country the epson would be about 900 euros. Is the price difference worth it for the average joe or is the cost of inks still going to be such that the epson edges it out?
Cheers!
Surely a different class of printer for a different demographic?
@@hedydd2 I guess, but for the difference in price it seems like an interesting proposition. To me €900 is already way beyond what I would consider if I don't know that I want to do printing regularly. So for me at least I would be tempted by the 500 diff simply because it would be a state of the art printer in that case.
@@Salaaran Not only is it more expensive to buy than the Epson 8500 but the ink cost is likely to be several times as high in my experience. However if you have a need for the extra capabilities of the new Canon, and I’m sure many do, the excess purchase and running cost may well be justified. Wait for Keith’s review. I’m sure it will be a most interesting one.
@@hedydd2 of for sure, I am not in any rush at all, and I think I am unlikely to ever go this far out in terms of quality. Maybe a flawed analogy, but when I was playing a lot of guitar I Knew I wanted a specific model of les paul, so back then I decided to skip a "step" as the difference between the two was that great. So it would be interesting to see that question addressed. I frankly don't know how long the pigments/inks lasts on the pro series vs the epson :) Cheers mate
Two very different markets - the 8550 appeals to people concerned about ink costs, who still want a good printer. Remember that I rarely use the word 'best' without a lot of caveats. It's precisely because no-one remembers the caveats that I'm loathe to ever 'recommend' products
Is it possible that The cartdriges will last less?
No reason to think so. If there are differences, I suspect they will be minimal...
@@KeithCooper thanks
After you've put this through its paces, it would be interesting to see a "shoot-out" (although I know you don't do those!) between the 1100 and the Epson P900, as they seem to be the two obvious choices for relatively low-volume "fine art" use. I changed from Canon to Epson due to abysmal customer "service" from Canon and the P900 has served me well since I got it shortly after its intro, plus the 1000/1100 are huge/heavy. I've yet to try a longer than 22" print (it's supposed to handle up to 10' 9" or 3.3m) so I don't have the roll adapter, but I wonder if I could just manually feed a cut sheet (and how well will the 1100 handle that?).
Yes, I am planning some sort of comparisons ;-)
Long sheets are definitely something to try
Thanks Keith!
Thanks - it's been a while coming ;-)
Hopefully they will still support the PRO 1000 with ink?
Yes - for many years I was told.
Of course, thats not an official 'promise' but there should not be issues for quite some time
The ideal desktop wide format printer would be an Epson EcoTank A2 17” variant of the 8550.
Yes - something I've asked about ;-)
Indeed yes.
Would be interested to see how easy it is to connect up. Took me two days to get my Pro-1000 connected to my Mac system! The Canon website and support were next to useless. The guys at Fotospeed were far more helpful.
Will be a part of testing, but don't expect any serious differences between 1000 and 1100
Aleays great thanks
Thanks
Ink consumption in maintenance cycles is a big issue for me - P900 was much more economical. Would like an increase in total speed - not of actual printing, but the pfaffing around before and after. P900 is quicker. I had two P900s, but print feeding was very unreliable and they scratched delicate papers. No problem with the Pro-1000. Print quality not an issue for either printer.
Yes, my suspicion is that the maintenance [and speed] aspects of the pro-1100 will not differ significantly to the PRO-1000
Dear Mr. Cooper,
I own a Mitsubishi CP-M1A dye-sublimation printer which does 6” x 8” maximum print size. I am quite happy with it, when and if I can get it to work. I am especially happy with the fact that I don’t have to fuss with any ink, nor any maintenance whatsoever. But it looks like Mitsubishi have now stopped producing these printers.
I am now looking for a replacement printer. My questions to you are as follows:
1- Do you have any experience with Sawgrass, DNP or any other make of professional dye sub photo printers?
2- Would a Canon imagePROGRAF PRO-1100 printer provide me better image quality than any of these, and why?
Thank you in advance for your time and dedication to quality.
Sorry - I've not done any such testing of those [I need companies to loan me kit for testing]
The 1100 is not necessarily what I'd think of to replace such a printer - a lot depends on what you do with the prints and the volume.
I'll have a look though once one turns up to test.
@@KeithCooper Well, maybe Canon would be willing to loan you a Canon SELPHY CP1500 Wireless Compact Photo Printer, which is a dye-sublimation printer, along with a box of Canon KP-108IN comprised of three KP-36IP Photo Paper and three Color Ink Cassette giving you a total of 108 4"x6" Sheets.
@@derbi123 I'll enquire ;-)
However testing coming up will be the new PRO-1100 ;-)
I think for those of us that are happy with the 1000 model we already have, the question is how long will Canon continue to supply 1000 carts given the 4100 carts aren't compatible?
I'm told 'quite a few years' - but I've seen no definite info
Will the PRO-1000 be discontinued, and discounted now? Without a roller this new printer doesn't seem like a better successor.
Discontinued - eventually
Discounted - depends entirely of how much stock is sitting round in warehouses, and other commercial considerations
@@KeithCooper Thanks. Will definitely be looking for a discounted PRO-1000.
@@KeithCooper Forgot to ask, but will the inks also be discontinued?
No - should be around for years
Do a thorough web search as there currently is one retailer that has the Pro 1000 on sale now for $949.00 vs. the minimal $100.00 off Canon is now "promoting".
The fact that the 1100 doesn't have roll paper support is a bit disappointing. Did you say 8 years between the 1000 & 1100? To not offer that feature is not very "Pro" of Canon. Seems like it would've been better to replace that 5100 model you briefly mentioned which did allow roll paper then the 1000.
So it looks like Canon loyalists will have to choose between the 1100 if they can easily live without the roll paper support or the 2600 if they can't, which is both considerably bigger & also more expen$ive.
Indeed, not big changes
Yes, I always liked the iPF5100...
To me, the Pro-1100 is just a slightly updated Pro-1000, using different inks and a change in FW to accommodate the new inks and the 1Gbit LAN as well as printing up to 3.27m . No Paper Roll. Printing 1.2m on the current Pro-1000 is already a pain. Not to mention at 3.27m. I will keep my Pro-1000 as well as the spare one, which was cheaper than a new print head and a complete set of inks.
Not just to you... ;-)
Could be great for restaurants that want to print menus on a regular basis.
Yes, although not a use-case I tend to cover in my reviews
Keith, when you test the printer, please test the *scuff and water resistance of the new chroma optimizer* that's supposed to be more scratch resistant. I've mentioned before how this could *help prints be hung without needing spray or glass protection,* which would be a great blessing, since spraying prints is toxic and unhealthy, and glass and acrylic reflect light, obscuring our work, unless anti-reflection coated, which is expensive.
Not having to protect the prints would save a step and costs - would be very practical.
I'm aware your scratch tests would not be precise, but would be good enough to give us an idea if the new chroma optimizer will help protect prints from scratches, liquids and probably even ozone.
I've no idea how to test this in a meaningful way - it's not really that much different from before.
It will not replace sprays or glazing - it is the wax part of the new ink [not the optimiser] - read the PRO-x600 marketing materials.
The optimiser is no more 'wonder coating' than the old one
This is not the coating you are looking for
@@KeithCooper Thanks for explaining that the wax is in the inks, which could be even better if the optimizer has some sealant properties with or without the wax. I'm still hopeful. It wouldn't be that hard to A/B test with a print from a previous generation printer on the same paper.
The same small amount of water could be dropped on it, and compare the effect after so many minutes.
Both could be scratched in the same way.
Both could be handled with unclean hands to see how they differ in fingerprints showing.
Not having to spray or put glass over prints would be a Godsend!
I don't have a 1000 to make any comparison prints
I'm afraid I see nothing in Canon's marketing materials to suggest that the wax does anything more than make the surface a bit more resistant to gross scratch damage. The sort of damage you should never see if you take reasonable care!. It's aimed at commercial users handling/stacking prints.
Your wishes are destined to remain wishes I suspect...
@@KeithCooper Someday, someone will A/B test this. Then we'll know for sure.
I'm still not printing photos, but if and when I do again I'm really interested in finding out how well this inkset does without protection.
If you know someone locally who has a previous generation Canon of any size that has the previous generation inks, their prints could be tested against the 1100 you're getting, using the same paper of course.
Canon only has the chroma optimizer, which can cover the bare white paper, uninked areas.
I know you like Epson, but this could be a big advantage, especially if the chroma optimizer is tough enough and repels water - which means it could also protect the paper from dust and ozone.
It must help some, and maybe a lot.
This printer absolutely does not have the sort of 'coating' you seem to be looking for?
If it did what you are hoping for, it would be plastered all over Canon's marketing materials ;-)
As to liking Epson - yes, but the last 44" printer I owned was a Canon one and before that an Epson one ;-)
I want what best suits my work. At 17" for example, I want roll paper and a cutter - there are only two printers which do that P5000 and P5300 [hence my mention of the Canon iPF5100 in the video] Makes for a very easy choice ;-)
-So with new inks you have to use only canon ink?
-Do you have to use daily to keep head clean?
-Are there better programs that are downloadable from canon or anyone else that we can use with this printer?
Personally, I would only use Canon inks anyway... I'm sure people will eventually produce cheaper ink.
What sort of programs? The Canon PPL software is not bad for free.
I'll be showing this when I get one here to test.
@@KeithCooper I’m with you but I know many others refill Pro 1000 cartridges now. I only use Canon ink in my Pro 200.
@@KeithCooper I have PPL and I need a crash course on how to use it. I had trouble just printing two 5 x 7 on a letter size paper on my Pro 200. I’m still learning so much.. this is why I bought the pro 200. Hopefully I can upgrade to a Pro 1100 or 1000 as I print more.
@@glynnelectric Yes, it has its 'ways'.
I'll likely do a video about it when I have the 1100 here
@@KeithCooper I can’t wait to start learning Keith!
My Pro-1000 died about a year ago. First year I had it, it developed a squeal. Didn't know what it was and just couldn't make it to the repair center within the year warranty. When it died, all lcd text was in Japanese or Chinese and nothing functioned. I realized at that point that the squeal was a bad resister. Pathetic for modern day electronics. I did get five years out of the unit but, I surely didn't overtax it. One other word of advice, last time I talked to Canon, they stated that they no longer had authorized repair centers. Hope you live near a big city. I doubt anyone in a small city is going to take on these repairs. And, in spite of all the griping, I'd buy the Pro 1100 in a heartbeat.
Yes, support varies a lot by location...
Ohhhhhhh no , guess this has just reduced the resale value of my Pro-1000 !
The market should be around for a while yet ;-)
Scratch resistance is a real thing. My Epson SC P800 scratches all fine art papers and loads them all skewed. Epson's solution was "only use Epson papers otherwise we cannot guarantee print quality". I will never buy Epson again. Hello Canon!
Fair enough...
👍🏾🙏🏾 🏴🇸🇪🇹🇹
Indeed
Keith, since Canon has chosen not to offer a roll feed option, *please warn* potential customers in all of your video and written reviews of this printer that *3:2 ratio paper, 17 x 25 inch is not available in the most famous brands* like Hahnemuhle, Canson, Epson and even Canon, which only come in 17 x 22 inch (4:3 ratio). Most photographers have 3:2 sensors, so mostly shoot in 3:2. They'll be sorely disappointed that they can't use the most well known papers in this printer.
In the US, Red River, Moab and Inkpress come in 17 x 25 inch, but they don't replicate all of the famous brands' papers, and usually, only the famous brand papers are tested for print permanence, which can be a factor for those selling prints.
Canon should say on the front of the box and in their promos that paper for 3:2 ratio shooters (almost everyone) isn't available even in their own brand.
I can't understand how they think it's okay not to include a roll paper option, since even Canon doesn't make 3:2 size paper in 17 inches.
In Europe, if I remember correctly from our discussions, the same is true, except a few retailers had some Hahnemuhle in 3:2.
This is so strange. Makes no sense that they keep doing this, so we must warn photographers ourselves, so they don't get had.
I guess the issue (which is not Canon-specific) would mostly affect those who are going for borderless prints. And in order to address it those users could cut a sheet according to a 3:2 ratio from roll paper and then feed it to the printer. Admittedly it would take an extra step to get there, but it would not involve too much work on the user’s part, I think.
I'll note available paper sizes, as I do with every printer, but I hardly feel a warning is needed.
Here, paper comes in 'A' sizes so those inch sizes you mention won't mean much to many people.
I'll be printing on A2 and lengths chopped from 17" roll = that and A3+ [13x19] which is of course 3:2 with a half inch border
@@KeithCooper We discussed this before. If I remember correctly, the same problem applies in Europe; though, you know the dimensions better than me. Many admitted this is a serious problem in the thread you started at DPReview.
If you don't say anything in your videos and in the main body of your reviews, customers will learn the hard way after it's too late that they can't use their favorite papers with this printer. [Most are not going to cut by hand from a roll, which isn't precise, is time consuming, needs tools and a work surface. Then they'll have to fight the curl.]
Canon won't want you to say anything, but the people deserve to hear the truth so they know what they're getting into.
It's just RIDICULOUS that these paper companies don't provide full size 17" paper for 3:2 aspect ratio prints, the aspect ratio of the vast majority of cameras!
Yup - asked several people in the paper business [internationally, as well as the UK], and it ain't going to change...
@@KeithCooper Thanks for asking them. The solution is to buy a 17" printer that has a roll feed (not a Canon, it looks like) or a 24", which can use 17" rolls; though, it's way bigger and more money.
the one million question IS THE CANON 1100 STILL WASTING YOUR EXPENSIVE INK TROUGH THE DRAIN WHEN FLUSHING EVERY WEEK .LOOKS LIKE THE SAME . 'WHEN PRINTING NO BIG NUMBERS? I WAITED TO BUY THIS MACHINE ,BUT I NO LIKE TROWING MONEY FOR NOTHING. REGARDS THEO.
Could you be specific as to what you actually mean?
Oh and it appears your keyboard has a stuck caps lock key... :-)