Most Helpful Customer Reviews
364 of 367 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Faster, cheaper, better!, October 8, 2004
This review is from: Canon PIXMA iP5000 Photo Printer (Office Product)
I originally bought the Epson R200 because it was cheaper, but that printer guzzled ink like an SUV. So, I exchanged it for this printer, whose photos are just as good as the Epson (on glossy paper), with about 1/5 the ink costs. In the one year I had this printer (resulting in thousands of prints) the cheaper ink costs paid for themselves many times over.
One downside to the Canon is a tendency towards yellow tints (but you can adjust this). Also, the head-cleaning mechanism failed after a year of heavy use. By then I'd made thousands of prints, so I wasn't too upset, and in fact replaced the printer with an identical model.
The Pixma 5000's prints look stunningly great on glossy photo paper. They actually look better than the photo labs I've used, in my opinion. Contrast and color are great. Most 4-ink printers (as opposed to the 6-ink or 8-ink printers) suffer from "dithering", i.e. they give you tiny little dots instead of smooth colors, but the Canon has almost no visible dithering. The Canon's colors tend to be slightly yellow, but this can be adjusted in the print settings.
In photo quality, the Pixma 5000 beat every other 4-color Canon or Epson printer at my local store. Epson's "Durabright" printers pale in comparison, as do Canon's various all-in-one copier/scanner/printers.
However, photos on plain paper do not look good, and lack contrast and crispness. This is actually a problem with most inkjet printers, though the Epson R200 seems to do a better job with plain paper than the Canon, mainly because its black inks are somewhat darker. Printing on matte paper is also tricky - midtones come out too dark, so photos look dull and muddy unless you lighten the midtones in Photoshop.
The Pixma's small 1 picoliter droplets really help with text, which is crisper and sharper than the Epson R200. Text pages also print quite fast.
Best of all, the Canon is unusually efficient with ink. I got an impressive number of photos (over 250 glossy 4x6's) with each color cartridge, and almost 300 photos with the black cartridge. The Epson only gave me 50-60 photos per cartridge set. Not only do the Canon cartridges last longer, they are cheaper, and there are only 4 instead of 6 to buy. By my estimate, Canon ink costs 5-7 times less per page than Epson. In the long run this is a HUGE difference, and more than makes up for the slightly higher cost of the printer itself.
I have only one major gripe: After about 6 months of use, the printer's self-cleaning mechanism failed. This caused black streaks on the edge of prints. Cleaning the print head would help temporarily, but the streaks would return soon. After one year of heavy use, I had to replace the printer. But I definitely got my money's worth, and then some. Overall, this is still one of the best inkjet printers I've ever seen, combining high quality, low maintenance costs, and versatility with text and graphics.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
82 of 87 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Utterly amazing!, September 30, 2004
This review is from: Canon PIXMA iP5000 Photo Printer (Office Product)
Photos printed on photo paper would be hard to distinguish between those that came from a lab. Text quality is better than the older s and i series printers, but not quite laser quality on plain paper.
Works best with Canon's photo paper, but have had pretty good results with other glossy paper like, sepom (not as glossy but waterproof!) and red river paper.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
32 of 32 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Budget-friendly operating costs, February 9, 2005
This review is from: Canon PIXMA iP5000 Photo Printer (Office Product)
With all of the specifications to compare (e.g. pages per minute, dots per inch, number of different color cartridges), it is easy to forget cost of ownership. A year from now, that same stack of vacation and holiday pictures could cost you hundreds of dollars more with one brand compared to another.
Drop for drop, printer ink is probably the most expensive liquid you'll ever buy, and all printer companies want to lock you into buying their ink cartridges. Canon is no different in this regard, but by keeping cost of ink reasonable, customers who print a lot of pictures won't find they need a second mortgage to afford the ip5000.
Because printer companies "buy" market share by selling the printer at or below cost (This is basically how razor companies and video game console makers operate), they only profit from the consumables (ink cartridges, but also paper). This doesn't make them greedy any more than taking a loss on the front end made them altruistic. It does, however, make it important that you understand this: while many specs are pretty comparable, cost-per-picture varies very, very widely by manufacturer. Forewarned is forearmed.
Aside form the confidence of knowing that I could be spending a lot more for cartridges, my experience with the ip5000 has been nothing but positive.
The included CD and quick-start guide walk you through setup step-by-step. Consumer electronics companies are not always, ahem, known for clarity of user manuals or supporting material.
Text quality on plain paper is very good, though not quite up to the standard of either of the much more expensive laser printers I compared it to. In fairness, this is a photo printer first, but it will do a fine job on envelopes, presentations, and letters.
Photo quality, naturally, is highly dependent on paper. The only bad experience was accidentally using laser paper and having the ink smear. Use the right paper and whenever possible, use glossy paper stock for pictures.
The design is excellent. Not too many years ago, almost all printers were boxy, angular and downright homely. This shows how far printers have come. Its polished black finish is reflective (like a good auto paint job), offsetting the matte titanium-look trim around the edges. It manages to look smaller than it actually is and will not visually dominate a desk.
Overall, a very well executed printer. Recommended.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|