Researched a bunch of them and picked up a Pixma Pro 9000 for around $300 after rebate.
It was attractive because it seemed to have a superior resolution, 8-ink color gamut (CMYK/Pc/Pm/R/G),
used relatively inexpensive but good quality inks (the multipack of 8 has sold for around $54 on sale),
has ICC profiled inks and papers for digital color managed workflows, supports A3+ large papers,
and supports flat-feeding of some of the thicker media, semi-canvas art papers, et. al.
It had generally excellent reviews aside from a few reliability / warranty complaints (which seem inevitable with
any printer even the industrial quality ones AFAICT), and seemed the best choice compared to the similar EPSON
offerings because of the ink set cost which seemed lower, reportedly less propensity to clog nozzles,
and its overall feature set.
So far we've been pretty happy with it, and have done mostly 8x10, 8.5x11, 4x6, and 5x7 prints with a few
11x14s thrown in. It works well with a workflow through Photoshop taking advantage of color management, though
it generally seems to work well just printing with "Auto" color management too.
The lower end EPSONs I've had seemed to have very costly low capacity ink sets and develop difficult to clear
clogs fairly readily, possibly due to the pigment based inks the EPSONs I have seen use as opposed to the
dye inks on the Canons I've got.
I'd look at ink and paper cost over the volume of printing you expect to do in a year; that consideration can easily
eclipse the cost of the printer if you print moderately often. Many of the smaller 8.5x11 size personal photo printers
use ink tanks with relatively low volumetric capacity and with relatively high cost. Having individual color tanks versus
a combined CMY tank may be especially relevant for long term savings.
Based on this I'd start looking at even some of the more "industrial" 17" model papers if you're heavily into printed
photos and arts since they often can take continuous ink systems or at least larger capacity cartridges which
overall are more economical to use for high volume prints. They're also more likely to take roll fed paper which
can be another cost saving opportunity. After a several months to a couple of years you can easily find that you've
saved or spent excessively much more in consumables than you've spent on the printer itself whatever the printer "costs" to buy.
If not the MP470 (decent print quality print/copy/scan 8.5x11 unit) or the CANON Pixma Pro9000,
I'd look at EPSONs better flavors of the day, check reviews at Steve's Digicams, Luminous Landscapes,
et. al. sites.
As for taxes and local retailers, well, I often find it's cheaper to mail-order these sorts of things especially if your local
retailers don't have a good model selection of the better quality units or don't have reasonable prices.
Facebook
Twitter